LEANDRO C.

TULOD
Law on Public Corporations
Atty. Atty. Karlo Krisanto B. Inocencio

A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

1. What are the territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the
Philippines?

- The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the
provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays.

2. What do territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy under the 1987
Philippine Constitution?

- Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the territorial and political subdivisions
shall enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy to enable them to attain their
fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective
partners in the attainment of national goals.

3. What are the characteristics of a local government code to be enacted by

Congress as mandated by the 1987 Philippine Constitution?

- The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more
responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system
of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and referendum,
allocate among the different local government units their powers, responsibilities,
and resources, and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal,
term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, and all other
matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units.

4. Who shall exercise general supervision over local governments?

- The President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local
governments.

5. Are local governments allowed to create their own source of revenue?

- Yes. Each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of
revenues and to levy taxes, fees and charges.

6. What are the limitations to the power mentioned in No. 5?

- The Congress may provide such limitations consistent with the basic policy of local
 autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local
governments.

7. Are local governments entitled to a just share in national taxes?

- Yes, local government units shall have a just share in national taxes as determined
by law.

8. How does such share be released to local governments?

- The share of the local governments in national taxes shall be automatically released
to them.

9. Are local governments entitled to an equitable share in the proceeds of the

utilization and development of national wealth?

- Yes, local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the proceeds of the
utilization and development of the national wealth within their respective areas, in
the manner provided by law, including sharing the same with the inhabitants by
way of direct benefits.

10. How long is the term of office of an elective local official?

- The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall
be determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more
than three consecutive terms.

11. What is the effect of voluntary renunciation of an elective local official’s office?

- Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as
an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.

12. Are legislative bodies of local government allowed to have sectoral representations?

- Yes, Legislative bodies of local governments shall have sectoral representation as

may be prescribed by law.
13. May a province, city, municipality, or barangay be created, divided, merged,
abolished, or its boundary substantially altered?

- No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged,

abolished, or its boundary substantially altered, except in accordance with the
criteria established in the local government code and subject to approval by a
majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.

14. Can Congress create special metropolitan political subdivisions?

- The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political subdivisions, subject
to a plebiscite as set forth in Section 10, Article 10 of the 1987 Constitution. The
component cities and municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be
entitled to their own local executive and legislative assemblies. The jurisdiction of
the metropolitan authority that will thereby be created shall be limited to basic
services requiring coordination.

15. May local government units group themselves or consolidate or coordinate their
efforts, services, and resources?

- Local government units may group themselves, consolidate or coordinate their

efforts, services, and resources for purposes commonly beneficial to them in
accordance with law.

16. What shall the President provide for purposes of administrative decentralization?

- The President shall provide for regional development councils or other similar
bodies composed of local government officials, regional heads of departments and
other government offices, and representatives from non-governmental organizations
within the regions for purposes of administrative decentralization.

17. What is/are the purpose/s of these councils and bodies in relation to no. 17?

- The purposes of these councils and bodies are to strengthen the autonomy of the
units therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and development of
the units in the region.
18. What are the characteristics of autonomous regions to be created under the 1987
Philippine Constitution?

- There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the

Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas
sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social
structures, and other relevant characteristics within the framework of this
Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
Republic of the Philippines.

19. Who shall exercise general supervision over autonomous regions?

- The President shall exercise general supervision over autonomous regions.

20. In relation to no. 19, what shall be ensured in the exercise of general supervision?

- It is to ensure that laws are faithfully executed.

21. To whom all powers, functions and responsibilities not granted by the Constitution
be vested?

- All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted by this Constitution or by law
to the autonomous regions shall be vested in the National Government.

22. What shall the Congress enact for each autonomous region?

- The Congress shall enact an organic act for each autonomous region with the
assistance and participation of the regional consultative commission composed of
representatives appointed by the President from a list of nominees from multisectoral
bodies. The organic act shall define the basic structure of government for the region
consisting of the executive department and legislative assembly, both of which shall
be elective and representative of the constituent political units. The organic acts shall
likewise provide for special courts with personal, family, and property law
jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.

23. Who shall be responsible for the preservation of peace and order within the
regions?

- The preservation of peace and order within the regions shall be the responsibility of
 the local police agencies which shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and
utilized in accordance with applicable laws. The defense and security of the regions
shall be the responsibility of the National Government.

24. What is a corporation?

- A corporation is an artificial being created by operation of law, having the right of

succession and the powers, attributes, and properties expressly authorized by law or
incidental to its existence.

25. Define the classes of corporations according to purpose:

- 1. Quasi‐public corporations – public corporations created as agencies of the State

for narrow and limited purposes without the powers and liabilities of self‐governing
corporations.

- 2. Municipal corporations – body politic and corporate constituted by the

incorporation of inhabitants for purposes of local government. It is established by
law partly as an agency of the State to assist in the civil government of the country,
but chiefly to regulate and administer the local or internal affairs of the city, town or
district which is incorporated.

26. Can a private corporation be a GOCC? (Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA,
G.R. No. 177131, June 7, 2011; GCG Memorandum Order 2013-42)

- Not all corporations, which are not government owned or controlled, are ipso facto
to be considered private corporations as there exists another distinct class of
corporations or chartered institutions which are otherwise known as “public
corporations.” These corporations are treated by law as agencies or instrumentalities
of the government which are not subject to the tests of ownership or control and
economic viability but to different criteria relating to their public purposes/interests
or constitutional policies and objectives and their administrative relationship to the
government or any of its Departments or Offices. (The BSP is a public corporation
or a government agency or instrumentality with juridical personality, which does not
fall within the constitutional prohibition in Article XII, Section 16, notwithstanding
the amendments to its charter).

27. Is Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) classified as an instrumentality of the

state? (Liban v. Gordon, G.R. No. 175352, January 18, 2011)

- No, Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) classified as an instrumentality of the

 state. The PNRC is a member National Society of the International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement (Movement), which is composed of the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). the PNRC must not only be, but must also be
seen to be, autonomous, neutral and independent in order to conduct its activities in
accordance with the Fundamental Principles. The PNRC must not appear to be an
instrument or agency that implements government policy; otherwise, it cannot merit
the trust of all and cannot effectively carry out its mission as a National Red Cross
Society. It is imperative that the PNRC must be autonomous, neutral, and
independent in relation to the State.

28. Distinguish Public v. Private corporation:

- As to Purpose - Public Corporation is for the general good and welfare and
administration of local government or rendering service for the public interest while
private Corporation is formed for some private purpose, benefit, aim or end.

- As to manner of creation – Public corporation is created through legislation while

Private corporation is created through the voluntary agreement or act by and among
its members or incorporators.

29. What is a government owned and controlled corporation (GOCC)?

- Government-owned or controlled corporation refers to any agency organized as a

stock or non-stock corporation, vested with functions relating to public needs
whether governmental or proprietary in nature, and owned by the Government
directly or through its instrumentalities either wholly, or, where applicable as in the
case of stock corporations, to the extent of at least fifty-one (51) percent of its capital
stock. [Section 2 (13), Administrative Code of 1987]

30. What is a GOCC with a charter?

- Government-owned and controlled corporations with original charter means

GOOCCs created under special laws and not under general law.

31. What is a GOCC without a charter? (Feliciano v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No.
147402, January 14, 2004)

- In this case, Supreme Court ruled that GOCCs without original charters refer to
 corporations created under the Corporation Code but are owned and controlled by
the government.

32. Does GOCC fall under the classification of a public corporation?

- Yes, it falls under the non-municipal corporation. There are two kinds of public
corporation, namely, municipal and non-municipal. A municipal corporation in its
strict is the body politic constituted by the inhabitants of a city or town for the
purpose of local government thereof. It is the body politic established by law
particularly as an agency of the State to assist in the civil government of the country
chiefly to regulate the local and internal affairs of the city or town that is
incorporated. Non- municipal corporations, on the other hand, are public
corporations created as agencies of the State for limited purposes to take charge
merely of some public or state work other than community government.

33. What are the tests to determine whether a corporation is GOCC or private in
nature?

- Charter Test - The test to determine whether a corporation is government owned or

controlled, or private in nature is simple. Is it created by its own charter for the
exercise of a public function, or by incorporation under the general corporation law?

- Purpose Test - It is the test which determine whether the purpose of the corporation
is to render some public service or organized for the purpose of gain or profit.

- Totality Test - It is the test to determine whether the corporation has a total relation
to the State. If the corporation is created by the State as the latter’s own agency or
instrumentality to help it in carrying out its governmental functions, then that
corporation is considered public; otherwise, it is private.

34. What is the charter test? Is there an exception in the charter test? (Philippine
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Commission on Audit, et al.
G.R. No. 169752, September 25, 2007)

- If a corporation is created by its own charter for the exercise of a public function, it
is a GOCC. If it is incorporated under the Corporation Code, it is a private
Corporation.
35. What is the purpose test?

- If the corporation is created by the State as the latter’s own agency or instrumentality
to help it in carrying out its governmental functions, then that corporation is
considered public; otherwise, it is private. However, the purpose test cannot be taken
as a safe guide because most corporations are nowadays created to promote the
interest, common good, or convenience of the public.

36. What is the totality test?

- The true criterion to determine whether a corporation is public or private is found in

the totality of the relation of the corporation to the State. The fact that employees are
not registered with the GSIS, which should be the case if the employees are
considered government employees, is another indication of the corporation’s nature
as a private entity. The requirement of rendering periodic reports to the Civil
Governor is inconclusive to classify the corporation as a government instrumentality.
All corporations are creatures of the State, hence, there is a reserved right in the
legislature to investigate their activities to determine whether it acted within its
powers.

37. Distinguish Public Corporations from GOCC

Public Corporations GOCCs

a. As to purpose  Created for  A public corporation
political or organized as a stock
administrative or non-stock
purposes corporation, vested
connected with the with functions
public good in the relating to public
administration of interest or needs.
the civil
government.

b. As to ownership  They are formed  Owned by the

and organized by Government directly
the State for or through its
Government. instrumentalities
either wholly or by
majority share.
c. As to manner of  May only be created  Congress may create
creation through statute. GOCCs either by:
 e. Special charters
specific to each
GOCC; or

2. One special law

enabling charter
applicable to a class
of GOCCs. i.e. PD
198 (Local Water
District Law
applicable only to
local water districts
– Feliciano vs COA)
d. As to powers that may  May exercise state  If directly chartered
be exercised powers such as by a special law – as
police power, provided for in said
taxation and special law;
eminent domain  If organized under
the general
corporation law – as
provided for in Sec.
36 of the
Corporation Code
and such other
powers that may be
exercised under the
Corporation Code.
e. As to personality  Political subdivision  Separate and distinct
of the Republic of from the
the Philippines Government.

Note: When the law Note: The Republic,

vests in a like any individual,
government may form a
instrumentality corporation with
corporate powers, personality and
the instrumentality existence distinct
does not become a from its own. The
corporation. Unless separate personality
the government allows a GOCC to
instrumentality is hold and possess
organized as a stock properties in its own
or non-stock name and, thus,
corporation, it permit greater
remains a independence and
 government flexibility in its
instrumentality operation.
exercising not only (NADECO vs Cebu
governmental but City)
also corporate
powers. (Philippine
Fisheries
Development
Authority vs CA)

38. Define Municipal Corporation or Local Government Units

- A municipal corporation is a body politic and corporate entity constituted by the

incorporation of inhabitants for purpose of local government. It is established by law
partly as an agency of the State to assist in the civil government of the country and
chiefly to regulate and administer the local or internal affairs of the city, town, or
district which it is incorporated. Municipal corporations and LGUs are one and the
same entity.

39. What are the elements of a municipal corporation?

- The elements of a Municipal Corporation are:

a. Legal creation or incorporation;

b. A corporate name;

c. Inhabitants constituting the population; and d. Territory.

40. Do municipal corporations acquire separate and distinct personalities from the
officers composing it? (Municipality of Tangkal, Lanao del Norte v. Balindong,
G.R. No. 193340, January 11, 2017)

- Yes, a municipality has a personality that is separate and distinct from its mayor,
vice-mayor, sanggunian, and other officers composing it.

41. What is the dual nature of municipal corporations? (Sec. 15, LCG)

- Section 15, of Local Government Code provides that a local government unit created
 or recognized under LGC is a body politic and corporate endowed with powers to be
exercised by it in conformity with law. As such, it shall exercise powers as a
political subdivision of the national government and as a corporate entity
representing the inhabitants of its territory.

42. Distinguish the political and proprietary function of municipal corporations. (Vilas
v. City of Manila, 220 U.S. 345, April 3, 1911)

- Governmental powers are those exercised in administering the powers of the state
and promoting the public welfare and they include the legislative, judicial, public
and political powers of government. Examples are delivery of sand for a municipal
road, local legislation, control over police and abatement of nuisance. Proprietary
powers, on the other hand, are exercised for the special benefit and advantage of the
community and include those powers which are ministerial, private and corporate.
Examples are public cemeteries, markets, ferries and waterworks.

43. What are the types of municipal corporations?

- De jure municipal corporations – created or recognized by operation of law

- Municipal corporations by prescription – exercised their powers from time

immemorial with a charter, which is presumed to have been lost or destroyed

- De facto municipal corporations – where the people have organized themselves,

under color of law, into ordinary municipal bodies, and have gone on, year after
year, raising taxes, making improvements, and exercising their usual franchises, with
their rights dependent quite as much on acquiescence as on the regularity of their
origin.

44. What is a municipal corporation by prescription? (Camid v. Office of the

President, G.R. No. 161414, January 17, 2005)

- It has been ruled that municipal corporations may exist by prescription where it is
shown that the community has claimed and exercised corporate functions, with the
knowledge and acquiescence of the legislature, and without interruption or objection
for period long enough to afford title by prescription. These municipal corporations
have exercised their powers for a long period without objection on the part of the
government that although no charter is in existence, it is presumed that they were
duly incorporated in the first place and that their charters had been lost.
45. What is a de jure municipal corporation?

- De jure municipal corporations - those created or recognized by operation of law.

46. What is a de facto municipal corporation?

- One existing under a color of authority which may be a valid law enacted by the
legislature or an unconstitutional law, valid on its face, which has either (a) been
upheld for a time by the courts or (b) not yet been declared void; provided that a
warrant for its creation can be found in some other valid law or in the recognition of
its potential existence by the general laws or constitution of the state (The
Municipality of Malabang, Lanao Del Sur v. Benito, G.R. No. L-28113, March 28,
1969).

47. What are the requisites of a de facto municipal corporation?

- The essential requisites of de facto corporation are 1. Valid law authorizing

incorporation; 2. Attempt in good faith to organize under it; 3. Colorable compliance
with law Created with PDF; and 4. Assumption of corporate powers

48. What does the principle of local autonomy mean? (Basco v. PAGCOR, G.R. No.
91649, May 14, 1991)

- The principle of local autonomy does not make local governments sovereign within
the state, it simply means decentralization. It does not make local governments
sovereign within the state or an “imperium in imperio.” Local Government has been
described as a political subdivision of a nation or state which is constituted by law
and has substantial control of local affairs. In a unitary system of government, such
as the government under the Philippine Constitution, local governments can only be
an intra sovereign subdivision of one sovereign nation, it cannot be an imperium in
imperio. Local government in such a system can only mean a measure of
decentralization of the function of government.

49. Does the existence of local government units necessarily change the Philippines’
form of government from federal to unitary? (Lina v. Pano, G.R. No. 129093,
August 30, 2001)

- No. Ours is still a unitary form of government, not a federal state. Being so, any
form of autonomy granted to local governments will necessarily be limited and
 confined within the extent allowed by the central authority. Besides, the principle of
local autonomy under the 1987 Constitution simply means “decentralization”. It
does not make local governments sovereign within the state or an “imperium in
imperio.”

50. What is the characteristic of a local government unit in a unitary system of

government like the Philippines? (Limbona v. Mangelin, G.R. No. 80391, February
28, 1989)

- The autonomous government is free to chart its own destiny and shape its future
with minimum intervention from central authorities. “Decentralization of power, on
the other hand, involves an abdication of political power in favor of local
government units declared to be autonomous. In that case, the autonomous
government is free to chart its own destiny and shape its future with minimum
intervention from central authorities. According to a constitutional author,
decentralization of power amounts to “self-immolation,” since in that event, the
autonomous government becomes accountable not to the central authorities but to its
constituency.”

51. What is the purpose of delegation of power to local government units? (Pimentel,
Jr. v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 195770, July 17, 2012)

- For purposes of administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the

units therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and development of
the units in the region The Constitution declares it a policy of the State to ensure the
autonomy of local governments and even devotes a full article on the subject of local
governance which includes the following pertinent provisions: Section 3. The
Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more
responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system
of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and referendum,
allocate among the different local government units their powers, responsibilities,
and resources, and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal,
term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, and all other
matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units. x x x Section 14.
The President shall provide for regional development councils or other similar
bodies composed of local government officials, regional heads of departments and
other government offices, and representatives from non-governmental organizations
within the regions for purposes of administrative decentralization to strengthen the
autonomy of the units therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and
development of the units in the region.
52. Under Sec. 2 of the Local Government Code, what are the policies of the state with
respect to local government units?

- Under Sec. 2 of the Local Government Code, the policies of the state with respect to
local government units are:

a. Territory and subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and meaningful local
autonomy to enable them to attain fullest development and make them more
effective partners in attaining national goals;

b. To ensure accountability of LGUs through institution of effective mechanisms of

recall, initiative, and referendum; and

c. To require all national agencies and offices to conduct periodic consultations with
appropriate LGUs, NGOs, and People’s Organizations (POs) and other concerned
sector of community before any project or program is implemented in their
respective jurisdictions.

53. What is the operative principle of decentralization?

- It is the operative principle that guide the formulation and implementation of

policies and measures on local autonomy.

The formulation and implementation of policies and measures on local autonomy

shall be guided by the following operative principles:

a. There shall be an effective allocation among the different LGUs of their respective
powers, functions, responsibilities, and resources;

b. There shall be established in every LGU an accountable, efficient, and dynamic

organizational structure and operating mechanisms that will meet the priority needs
and service requirements of its communities;

c. Subject to civil service law, rules, and regulations, local officials and employees
paid wholly or mainly from local funds shall be appointed or removed, according to
the merit and fitness, by the appropriate appointing authority;

d. The vesting of duty, responsibility, and accountability in local government units

shall be accompanied with provision for reasonably adequate resources to discharge
their powers and effectively carry out their functions; hence, they shall have the
power to create and broaden their own sources of revenue and the right to a just
share in national taxes and an equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization and
development of the national wealth within their respective areas;
 e. Provinces with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and
municipalities with respect to component barangays, shall ensure that the acts of
their component units are within the scope of their prescribed powers and functions;

f. Local government units may group themselves, consolidate or coordinate their

efforts, services, and resources for purposes commonly beneficial to them;

g. The capabilities of local government units, especially the municipalities and

barangays, shall be enhanced by providing them with opportunities to participate
actively in the implementation of national programs and projects;

h. There shall be a continuing mechanism to enhance local autonomy not only by

legislative enabling acts but also by administrative and organizational reforms;

i. Local government units shall share with the national government the responsibility
in the management and maintenance of ecological balance within their territorial
jurisdiction, subject to the provisions of this Code and national policies;

j. Effective mechanisms for ensuring the accountability of local government units to

their respective constituents shall be strengthened in order to upgrade continually the
quality of local leadership;

k. The realization of local autonomy shall be facilitated through improved

coordination of national government policies and programs and extension of
adequate technical and material assistance to less developed and deserving local
government units;
l. The participation of the private sector in local governance, particularly in the
delivery of basic services, shall be encouraged to ensure the viability of local
autonomy as an alternative strategy for sustainable development; and

m. The national government shall ensure that decentralization contributes to the

continuing improvement of the performance of local government units and the
quality of community life.

54. What is the concept of associative relationship or association? (Province of North

Cotabato v. Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on
Ancestral Domain, G.R. No. 183591, October 14, 2008)

- The international law concept of associative relationship or association is formed

when two states of unequal power voluntarily establish durable links. In the basic
model, one state, the associate, delegates certain responsibilities to the other, the
principal, while maintaining its international status as a state. Free associations
represent a middle ground between integration and independence.

55. Is the concept of associative relationship or association constitutional? (Province of

North Cotabato vs. Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain,
 supra)

- No. The concept of association is not recognized under the 1987 Constitution. No
province, city, or municipality, not even the ARMM, is recognized under our laws as
having an associative relationship with the national government. It also implies the
recognition of the associated entity as a state.

56. What are the limitations on the local autonomy of LGUs? (1987 Philippine
Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 4; Dadole v. COA, G.R. No. 125350, December 3, 2002)

- The limitations on the Local Autonomy of LGUs are:

a. General Supervision of the President – the President of the Philippines shall

exercise general supervision over local governments. (Art. X, Sec. 4, 1987
Constitution)

b. Control of Congress – Even as the Constitution guarantees autonomy to local

government units, the exercise of local autonomy is still subject to the power of
control by Congress (albeit some notable powers which cannot now be withdrawn
by mere stature).

57. What are the salient features of the Local Government Code? (LGC, Sec. 17)

- The salient features of the Local Government Code of 1991 are:

a. There is devolution of certain national governmental powers to LGU.

b. Increase in national tax share for LGUs from 11% to 40% starting 1994. c.
Increase in tax power.

Devolved powers are:

a. Public works
b. Social welfare
c. Construction of school buildings and facilities
d. Health
e. Agriculture
f. Tourism functions

Devolution shall also include the transfer to LGUs of the records, equipment, and other
assets and personnel of national agencies and offices corresponding to the devolved
powers, functions and responsibilities. (LGC, Sec. 17)

58. What are the kinds of autonomy? (Limbona v. Mangelin, G.R. No. 80391 February
28, 1989

- The kinds of autonomy are:

 a. Decentralization of administration – exists when the central government delegates
administrative powers to political subdivisions in order to broaden the base of
government power. In the process, this makes LGUs more responsive and
accountable and ensure their fullest development as self-reliant communities and
make them more effective partners in the pursuit of national development and social
progress. At the same time, it relieves the central government of the burden of
managing local affairs and enables it to concentrate on national concerns.

b. Decentralization of power – involves abdication of political power in favor of

LGUs declared autonomous. In that case, the autonomous government is free to
chart its own destiny and shape its future with minimum intervention from central
authorities. This amounts to self-immolation because the autonomous government
becomes accountable not to the central authorities but to its constituency.

59. What are the three forms of decentralization?

- The three forms of decentralization:

a. Devolution – it is the transfer of power and authority from the national

government to LGUs as the territorial and political subdivisions of the State. The
nature of power transfer is political and the approach is territorial or areal.

b. Deconcentration – it is the transfer of power, authority or responsibility, or the

discretion to plan, decide and manage from central point or local levels, but within
the central or national government itself. The nature of the transfer is administrative
and the approach is sectoral.

c. Debureaucratization – it is the transfer of some public functions and

responsibilities, which the government may perform, to private entities or
nongovernmental organizations; it is people’s empowerment or participation in local
governance.

60. What is devolution? (CSC v. Yu, G.R. No. 189041, July 31, 2012; Disomangcop v.
Datumanong, G.R. No. 149848, November 25, 2004; Executive Order No. 138, s.
2021 and its IRR)

- Devolution is the transfer of power and authority from the national government to
LGUs as the territorial and political subdivisions of the State. The nature of power
transfer is political and the approach is territorial or areal.

61. What is deconcentration? (Disomangcop v. Datumanong, supra)

- Deconcentration it is the transfer of power, authority or responsibility, or the

discretion to plan, decide and manage from central point or local levels, but within
the central or national government itself. The nature of the transfer is administrative
 and the approach is sectoral.

62. What is debureaucratization?

- It is a form of decentralization which involves the transfer of powers and functions

from the government to nongovernment organizations (NGO’s) and people’s
organization (PO’s), including the private sector, all of which are sometimes referred
to collectively as the “civil society”.

63. What is local fiscal autonomy? (Pimentel v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 132988, July 19,
2000)

- Fiscal autonomy means that local governments have the power to create their own
sources of revenue in addition to their equitable share in the national taxes released
by the national government, as well as the power to allocate their resources in
accordance with their own priorities. It extends to the preparation of their budgets,
and local officials in turn have to work within the constraints thereof. They are not
formulated at the national level and imposed on local governments, whether they are
relevant to local needs and resources or not. Hence, the necessity of a balancing of
viewpoints and the harmonization of proposals from both local and national
officials, who in any case are partners in the attainment of national goals. Local
fiscal autonomy does not however rule out any manner of national government
intervention by way of supervision, in order to ensure that local programs, fiscal and
otherwise, are consistent with national goals. Significantly, the President, by
constitutional fiat, is the head of the economic and planning agency of the
government, primarily responsible for formulating and implementing continuing,
coordinated and integrated social and economic policies, plans and programs for the
entire country. However, under the Constitution, the formulation and the
implementation of such policies and programs are subject to "consultations with the
appropriate public agencies, various private sectors, and local government units."
The President cannot do so unilaterally.

64. What is Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA)? (Alvarez v. Guingona, G.R. No.
118303, January 31, 1996)

- The IRAs are items of income because they form part of the gross accretion of the
funds of the local government unit. The IRAs regularly and automatically accrue to
the local treasury without need of any further action on the part of the local
government unit. They thus constitute income which the local government can
invariably rely upon as the source of much needed funds.

65. Can the President of the Philippines exercise power over LGU on fiscal matters?
(Pimentel v. Aguirre, supra)

- As chief fiscal officer of the country, the President supervises fiscal development in
the local government units and ensures that laws are faithfully executed. For this
 reason, he can set aside tax ordinances if he finds them contrary to the Local
Government Code. Ordinances cannot contravene statutes and public policy as
declared by the national government. The goal of local economy is not to "end the
relation of partnership and interdependence between the central administration and
local government units," but to make local governments "more responsive and
accountable" [to] "ensure their fullest development as self-reliant communities and
make them more effective partners in the pursuit of national development and social
progress."

66. What are the requisites for the exercise of the president’s power of fiscal
interference over LGUs? (Pimentel v. Aguirre, supra)

- The requisites before the President may interfere in local fiscal matters are:

a. an unmanaged public sector deficit of the national government;

b. consultations with the presiding officers of the Senate and the House of
Representatives and the presidents of the various local leagues; and

c. the corresponding recommendation of the secretaries of the Department of

Finance, Interior and Local Government, and Budget and Management.
Furthermore, any adjustment in the allotment shall in no case be less than thirty
percent (30%) of the collection of national internal revenue taxes of the third
fiscal year preceding the current one.

67. What are the territorial and political subdivisions enjoying local autonomy? (LGC,
Secs. 384, 440, 448 and 459; 1987 PH Constitution Art. X Secs. 11 and 15)

The territorial and political subdivisions enjoying local autonomy are:

a. Barangay (LGC, Secs. 384)
b. Municipality (LGC, Secs. 440)
c. City (LGC, Secs. 448)
d. Province (LGC, Secs. 459)

SECTION 11. The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political
subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set forth in Section 10 hereof. The component
cities and municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be entitled to their
own local executives and legislative assemblies. The jurisdiction of the metropolitan
authority that will hereby be created shall be limited to basic services requiring
coordination.

SECTION 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in
the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas
sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social
 structures, and other relevant characteristics within the framework of this Constitution
and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the
Philippines.

68. What are the roles of local government units? (LGC, Secs. 384, 440, 448, and 459)

- SECTION 384. Role of the Barangay. – As the basic political unit, the barangay
serves as the primary planning and implementing unit of government policies, plans,
programs, projects, and activities in the community, and as a forum wherein the
collective views of the people may be expressed, crystallized and considered, and
where disputes may be amicably settled.

SECTION 440. Role of the Municipality. – The municipality, consisting of a group

of barangays, serves primarily as a general purpose government for the coordination
and delivery of basic, regular and direct services and effective governance of the
inhabitants within its territorial jurisdiction.

SECTION 448. Role of the City. – The city, consisting of more urbanized and
developed barangays, serves as a general purpose government for the coordination
and delivery of basic, regular, and direct services and effective governance of the
inhabitants within its territorial jurisdiction.

SECTION 459. Role of the Province. – The province, composed of a cluster of

municipalities, or municipalities and component cities, and as a political and
corporate unit of government, serves as dynamic mechanism for developmental
processes and effective governance of local government units within its territorial
jurisdiction.

69. How may an LGU be created, divided, merged, and abolished, or its boundaries
otherwise substantially altered? (LGC, Sec. 6)

- SECTION 6. Authority to Create Local Government Units. – A local government

unit may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundaries substantially
altered either by law enacted by Congress in the case of a province, city,
municipality, or any other political subdivision, or by ordinance passed by the
sangguniang panlalawigan or sangguniang panlungsod concerned in the case of a
barangay located within its territorial jurisdiction, subject to such limitations and
requirements prescribed in this Code.

70. Can Congress validly delegate to an LGU the power to create legislative districts?
(Sema v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177597, July 16, 2008)

- No. Under the present Constitution, as well as in past Constitutions, the power to
increase the allowable membership in the House of Representatives, and to
reapportion legislative districts, is vested exclusively in Congress. Section 5, Article
VI of the Constitution provides:
 SECTION 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than
two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected
from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the
Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective
inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as
provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national,
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous,

compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred
fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative.

(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous,

compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred
fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative.

71. Is plebiscite a requirement for the creation, conversion, division, merger, abolition,
and substantial alteration of a local government unit? (1987 PH Constitution, Art
X, Sec. 10; LGC, Sec. 10; Tan v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 73155, July 11, 1986)

- Yes, in accordance with the criteria set by the LGC, no province, city, municipality,
or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary
substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in the local
government code and subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite in the political units affected (Art. X, Sec. 10 of the 1987 Constitution)

A plebiscite for creating a new province should include the participation of the
residents of the mother province in order to conform to the constitutional
requirement (Tan v. COMELEC)

Said Plebiscite shall be conducted by the COMELEC within one hundred twenty
(120) days form the date of effectivity of the law or ordinance effecting such action,
unless said law or ordinance fixes another date (LGC, Sec. 10)

72. What is the effect of a boundary dispute in relation to creation, conversion,

division, merger, abolition, and substantial alteration of a local government unit?
(City of Pasig v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 125646, September 10, 1999)

- A case involving boundary dispute between LGUs presents a prejudicial question

which must be decided first before plebiscites for the creation of proposed barangays
may be held. (City of Pasig v. COMELEC)

73. What should be the basis in the creation and conversion of LGUs? (LGC, Sec. 7)
 - As a general rule, the creation of local government units ot its conversion form one
level to another shall be based on:

1. Verifiable indicators of Viability; and

2. Protected capacity to provide services (LGC, Sec. 7)

74. What are the essential requisites for the creation and conversion of municipal
corporations? (LGC, Secs. 6,7, and 10)

- The essential Requisites for the Creation and Conversion of Municipal Corporations:

1. Enacting Law or ordinance (LGS, Sec. 6)

2. Income

3. Population

4. Land Area or territory (LGC, Sec. 7)

5. Attestation by the DOF, PSA, and LMB of indicators; and 6. Plebiscite (LGC,
Sec. 10)

75. What are the verifiable indicators for the creation or conversion of an LGU?
(LGC, Sec. 7; Mariano v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 118577, March 7, 1995)

The verifiable Indicators for the Creation or Conversion of a LGUs are:

1. Population- is based on the total number of inhabitants within the territorial

jurisdiction of the local government unit;

2. Income- must be sufficient, based on acceptable standards, to provide for all essential
facilities and services commensurate with the size of its population; and

3. Land area- must be contiguous unless it compromise two or more islands or is

separated by a local government unit; properly identified by metes and bounds; and
sufficient to provide for basic services and facilities (LGC, Sec. 7). Compliance with the
above-cited indicators shall be attested by the National Statistics Office (now Philippine
Statistics Authority (PSA) as created by R.A. No. 10525), the department of Finance and
the Land Management Bureau of the DENR, respectively (LGC, Sec. 7).

The requirement that the territory of newly- created LGUs be identified by metes and
bounds is intended to provide the means by which the area o the LGUs may be
reasonably ascertained. As long as the territorial jurisdiction may be reasonably
ascertained- by referring to common boundaries with the neighboring municipalities-
 then, the legislative intent has been sufficiently served. (Mariano v. COMELEC)

76. Under the law, how may a barangay be created? (LGC, Secs. 385 and 386 [a])

- Creation of Barangays:

Who may create:

A barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary

substantially altered by law or by an ordinance of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or
Sangguniang Panglungsod. Where a barangay is a created by an ordinance of the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan, the recommendation of the Sangguniang Bayan
concerned shall be necessary (LGC, Sec. 385) Congress is not precluded form
directly creating barangays despite the delegation of such power to the city and
provincial sanggunians and notwithstanding the requirements set forth by law (LGC,
Sec. 386, Par.[a]. Appropriation of budget of barangay created by Congress shall be
included in the Genera; Appropriation Act, while a barangay created by the Province
or City shall depend on the crating body for its budget.

Substantive requisites:

a. Population- at least two thousand (2,000) inhabitants. Except that in cities and
municipalities within the Metro Manila or Highly Urbanized cities, there must be at
least 5,000 inhabitants as certified by the PSA.

b. Income- no minimum income requirement;

c. Land Area- no minimum requirement, but it must be contiguous except when the
barangay is comprised of two or more islands (LGC, Sec. 386).

77. Under the law, how may a municipality be created? (LGC, Secs. 441 and 442)

- It may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially altered

only by an act of Congress subject to the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite (LGC, Sec. 441).
The Organic Act for the ARMM provides that its Regional Assembly may create,
divide, merge, abolish or substantially alter boundaries of any municipality or
barangay in accordance with the criteria laid down by the existing law subject to
approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly
affected. It may also change the names o such local government units, public places
and institutions (RA 6734, Art. VII, Sec. 2).

Substantive Requisites:

a. Population- at least twenty-five thousand (25, 000) inhabitants as certified by the

PSA;
 b. Income-average annual income of at least Two and a half million pesos (Php 2.5
million) for the last two consecutive years based on the 1991 constat prices as
certified by the provincial treasurer; and

c. Land Area- a contiguous territory of fifty (50) square kilometers except if

composed of one or more islands as certified by the LMB (LGC, Sec. 442).

78. Under the law, how may a component city be created? (LGC, Secs. 449 and 450)

- It may be created, divided, merged or abolished, or its boundary substantially altered

only by an act of Congress subject to criteria provided in the Code (LGC, Sec. 449).

Substantive Requisites:

a. Income (indispensable requirement) - at least One Million pesos (P100 million)

for the last two consecutive years based on 2000 constant prices, as certified by the
DOF.

b. Either of the following:

1. Land Area- contiguous territory of at last one hundred (100) square kilometers as
certified by the LMB; or

2. Population- at least one hundred fifty thousand (150,000) inhabitants as certified

by PSA (LGC, Sec. 450, as amended by RA 9009)

79. What are independent component cities? (LGC, Sec. 451)

- Independent Component Cities (ICCs) - these are component cities whose charters
prohibit their voters from voting for provincial elective officials (LGC, Sec. 451).

An independent component city are both component cities as distinguished from

highly urbanized cities. The only difference between them is that the charters of the
independent component cities prohibit their voters from voting for provincial
elective officials and such cities are independent of the provinces in which they are
located. (Miranda v. Aguirre).

80. What are the so-called cityhood laws? (League of Cities of the Philippines v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 176951, February 15, 2011)

- It is the conversion of the municipality into a component city. Congress enacted

cityhood laws containing a common provision exempting several municipalities
from the new P100-million income requirement imposed by RA No. 9009.
81. Are these cityhood laws valid and constitutional? (League of Cities of the
Philippines v. COMELEC, supra)

Yes. On April 12, 2011, the Court upheld its ruling with finality that the Cityhood Laws
are constitutional. The Court ratiocinated that: “We should not ever lose sight of the fact
that the 16 cities covered by the Cityhood Laws not only had conversion bills pending
during the 11th Congress but have also complied with the requirements of the LGC
prescribed prior to its amendment by RA No. 9009. Congress undeniably gave these
cities all the considerations that justice and fair play demanded. Hence, this Court should
do no less by stamping its imprimatur to the clear and unmistakable legislative intent
and by duly recognizing the certain collective wisdom of Congress.”

82. Did the cityhood laws violate the equal protection clause? (League of Cities of the
Philippines v. COMELEC, supra)

- No. The Cityhood Laws do not violate Section 6, Article X and the equal protection
clause of the Constitution. Both the November 18, 2008 Decision and the August 24,
2010 Resolution impress that the Cityhood Laws violate the equal protection clause
enshrined in the Constitution. Further, it was also ruled that Section 6, Article X was
violated because the Cityhood Laws infringed on the “just share” that petitioner and
petitioners-in-intervention shall receive from the national taxes (IRA) to be
automatically released to them. Upon more profound reflection and deliberation, we
declare that there was valid classification, and the Cityhood Laws do not violate the
equal protection clause. As this Court has ruled, the equal protection clause of the
1987 Constitution permits a valid classification, provided that it: (1) rests on
substantial distinctions; (2) is germane to the purpose of the law; (3) is not limited to
existing conditions only; and (4) applies equally to all members of the same class.

83. May a component city be converted into a highly urbanized city? What are the
requisites? (LGC, Sec. 453)

- Yes. SEC. 453. Duty to Declare Highly Urbanized Status. - It shall be the duty of the
President to declare a city as highly urbanized within thirty (30) days after it shall
have met the minimum requirements prescribed in the immediately preceding
section, upon proper application therefor and ratification in a plebiscite by the
qualified voters therein.

Requisites are provided under SEC. 452. Highly Urbanized Cities, to wit:

(a) Cities with a minimum population of two hundred thousand (200,000)

inhabitants, as certified by the National Statistics Office, and with the latest
annual income of at least Fifty Million Pesos (P=50,000,000.00) based on 1991
constant prices, as certified by the city treasurer, shall be classified as highly
urbanized cities.
 (b) Cities which do not meet the above requirements shall be considered component
cities of the province in which they are geographically located. If a component
city is located within the boundaries of two (2) or more provinces, such city shall
be considered a component of the province of which it used to be a municipality.

(c) Qualified voters of highly urbanized cities shall remain excluded from voting for
elective provincial officials. Unless otherwise provided in the Constitution or this
Code, qualified voters of independent component cities shall be governed by
their respective charters, as amended, on the participation of voters in provincial
elections. Qualified voters of cities who acquired the right to vote for elective
provincial officials prior to the classification of said cities as highly-urbanized
after the ratification of the Constitution and before the effectivity of this Code,
shall continue to exercise such right.

84. May qualified voters of highly urbanized cities vote for elective provincial officials?
(LGC, Sec. 452)

- Qualified voters of highly urbanized cities shall remain excluded from voting for
elective provincial officials. Unless otherwise provided in the Constitution or this
Code, qualified voters of independent component cities shall be governed by their
respective charters, as amended, on the participation of voters in provincial
elections. Qualified voters of cities who acquired the right to vote for elective
provincial officials prior to the classification of said cities as highly urbanized after
the ratification of the Constitution and before the effectivity of this Code, shall
continue to exercise such right.

85. Under the law, how may a province be created? (LGC, Secs. 460 and 461)

- A province may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially

altered, only by an Act of Congress and subject to approval by a majority of the
votes cast in a plebiscite to be conducted by the Comelec in the local government
unit or units directly affected. The plebiscite shall be held within one hundred twenty
(120) days from the date of effectivity of said Act, unless otherwise provided
therein.

The requisites for creation are:

- (a) A province may be created if it has an average annual income, as certified by

the Department of Finance, of not less than Twenty million pesos (P=20,000,000.00)
based on 1991 constant prices and either of the following requisites:

(i) a contiguous territory of at least two thousand (2,000)

square kilometers, as certified by the Lands Management
Bureau; or,
 (ii) a population of not less than two hundred fifty thousand
(250,000) inhabitants as certified by the National Statistics
Office: Provided, That, the creation thereof shall not reduce
the land area, population, and income of the original unit or
units at the time of said creation to less than the minimum
requirements prescribed herein.

(b) The territory need not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or more islands or
is separated by a chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income of
the province.

(c) The average annual income shall include the income accruing to the general
fund, exclusive of special funds, trust funds, transfers, and non-recurring income.

86. Is there a valid exception on the provisions of the LGC specifically Sec. 461?
(Navarro et al. v. Executive Secretary Ermita, G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011)

- The Local Government Code contains no exception to the income and population or
land area requirements in creating provinces. What the Code relaxed was the
contiguity rule for provinces consisting of "two (2) or more islands or is separated by
a chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income of the province." The
minimum land area of 2,000 square kilometers in the Code for the creation of a
province was never changed, and no exception was ever created by law. Hence, the
exception created in the implementing rule1 of the Local Government Code,
exempting provinces "composed of one (1) or more islands" from the minimum land
area requirement, is void for being ultra vires, granting a statutory exception that the
Local Government Code clearly withheld. The implementing rule, being a mere
administrative regulation to implement the Local Government Code, cannot amend
the Code but must conform to the Code. Only Congress, and not any other body, is
constitutionally empowered to create, through amendatory legislation, exceptions to
the land area requirement in Section 461 of the Code.

87. Is land area, as an indicator of the viability of LGU, conclusive? (Navarro et al. v.
Executive Secretary Ermita, supra)

- What is more, the land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of a local
government unit, is not conclusive in showing that Dinagat cannot become a
province, taking into account its average annual income of ₱82,696,433.23 at the
time of its creation, as certified by the Bureau of Local Government Finance, which
is four times more than the minimum requirement of ₱20,000,000.00 for the creation
of a province. The delivery of basic services to its constituents has been proven
possible and sustainable. Rather than looking at the results of the plebiscite and the
May 10, 2010 elections as mere fait accompli circumstances which cannot operate in
favor of Dinagat’s existence as a province, they must be seen from the perspective
that Dinagat is ready and capable of becoming a province. This Court should not be
 instrumental in stunting such capacity. As we have held in League of Cities of the
Philippines v. Commission on Elections35 — Ratio legis est anima. The spirit rather
than the letter of the law. A statute must be read according to its spirit or intent, for
what is within the spirit is within the statute although it is not within its letter, and
that which is within the letter but not within the spirit is not within the statute. Put a
bit differently, that which is within the intent of the lawmaker is as much within the
statute as if within the letter, and that which is within the letter of the statute is not
within the statute unless within the intent of the lawmakers. Withal, courts ought not
to interpret and should not accept an interpretation that would defeat the intent of the
law and its legislators. So as it is exhorted to pass on a challenge against the validity
of an act of Congress, a co-equal branch of government, it behooves the Court to
have at once one principle in mind: the presumption of constitutionality of statutes.
This presumption finds its roots in the tri-partite system of government and the
corollary separation of powers, which enjoins the three great departments of the
government to accord a becoming courtesy for each other’s acts, and not to interfere
inordinately with the exercise by one of its official functions. Towards this end,
courts ought to reject assaults against the validity of statutes, barring of course their
clear unconstitutionality. To doubt is to sustain, the theory in context being that the
law is the product of earnest studies by Congress to ensure that no constitutional
prescription or concept is infringed. Consequently, before a law duly challenged is
nullified, an unequivocal breach of, or a clear conflict with, the Constitution, not
merely a doubtful or argumentative one, must be demonstrated in such a manner as
to leave no doubt in the mind of the Court.

88. How may a sub-province be converted into a province? (LGC, Sec. 462)

SEC. 462. Existing Sub-Provinces. - Existing sub- provinces are hereby converted into
regular provinces upon approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite to be held
in the said subprovinces and the original provinces directly affected. The plebiscite shall
be conducted by the Comelec simultaneously with the national elections following the
effectivity of this Code. The new legislative districts created as a result of such
conversion shall continue to be represented in Congress by the duly-elected
representatives of the original districts out of which said new provinces or districts were
created until their own representatives shall have been elected in the next regular
congressional elections and qualified. The incumbent elected officials of the said sub-
provinces converted into regular provinces shall continue to hold office until June 30,
1992. Any vacancy occurring in the offices occupied by said incumbent elected
officials, or resulting from expiration of their terms of office in case of a negative vote in
the plebiscite results, shall be filled by appointment by the President. The appointees
shall hold office until their successors shall have been elected in the regular local
elections following the plebiscite mentioned herein and qualified. After effectivity of
such conversion, the President shall fill up the position of governor of the newly-created
province through appointment if none has yet been appointed to the same as
hereinbefore provided, and shall also appoint a vice-governor and the other members of
the sangguniang panlalawigan, all of whom shall likewise hold office until their
successors shall have been elected in the next regular local elections and qualified. All
 qualified appointive officials and employees in the career service of the said
subprovinces at the time of their conversion into regular provinces shall continue in
office in accordance with civil service law, rules and regulations.

89. Is R.A. 6734 valid? (Abbas v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 89651, November 10, 1989)

- Yes. In the case of Abbas vs. COMELEC, the court rules that Republic Act No.
6734, the Organic Act of Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) is
constitutional. The creation of ARMM does not come about with the passage of the
Act. It must comply with the constitutionally prescribed requirements such as the
holding of a plebiscite. The Organic Act is not violative of the Tripoli Agreement
since the former is a later enactment. Further, the Agreement must conform with
national laws such as the Organic Act which incorporates substantially the same
requirements embodied in the Constitution and fills in the details, thus: SEC. 13. The
creation of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao shall take effect when
approved by a majority of the votes cast by the constituent units provided in
paragraph (2) of Sec. 1 of Article II of this Act in a plebiscite which shall be held not
earlier than ninety (90) days or later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the
approval of this Act: Provided, That only the provinces and cities voting favorably in
such plebiscite shall be included in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
The provinces and cities which in the plebiscite do not vote for inclusion in the
Autonomous Region shall remain the existing administrative determination, merge
the existing regions.

90. Is R.A. 6766 valid? (Ordillo v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 93054, December 4, 1990)

- Yes. As discussed in the case of Ordillo vs COMELEC, the sections of Republic Act
No. 6766 show that a one province Cordillera Autonomous Region was never
contemplated by the law creating it. rticle XII, Section 10 of the law creates a
Regional Planning and Development Board composed of the Cordillera Governor,
all the provincial governors and city mayors or their representatives, two members of
the Cordillera Assembly, and members representing the private sector. The Board
has a counterpart in the provincial level called the Provincial Planning and
Development Coordinator. The Board's functions (Article XII, Section 10, par. 2,
Republic Act No. 6766) are almost similar to those of the Provincial Coordinator's
(Title Four, Chapter 3, Article 10, Section 220 (4), Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 —
Local Government Code). If it takes only one person in the provincial level to
perform such functions while on the other hand it takes an entire Board to perform
almost the same tasks in the regional level, it could only mean that a larger area must
be covered at the regional level. The respondent's theory of the Autonomous Region
being made up of a single province must, therefore, fail. To contemplate the
situation envisioned by the respondent would not only violate the letter and intent of
the Constitution and Republic Act No. 6766 but would also be impractical and
illogical.
91. What is the nature of MMDA? (MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc., G.R.
No. 135962, March 27, 2000)

- It is an agency created for the purpose of laying down policies and coordinating with
the various national government agencies, people's organizations, non-governmental
organizations and the private sector for the efficient and expeditious delivery of
basic services in the vast metropolitan area. The powers of the Metropolitan Manila
Development Authority are limited to the following acts: formulation, coordination,
regulation, implementation, preparation, management, monitoring, setting of
policies, installation of a system and administration. MMDA is not a local
government unit or a public corporation endowed with legislative power. It is not
even a "special metropolitan political subdivision" as contemplated in Section 11,
Article X of the Constitution since creation of a "special metropolitan political
subdivision" requires the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in
the political units directly affected. Republic Act No. 7924 was not submitted to the
inhabitants of Metro Manila in a plebiscite. It is the local government units that
possess legislative power and police power.

92. What are the requirements for the division and merger of LGU? (LGC, Sec. 8)

- The requirements for the division and merger of LGU are:

1. It shall not reduce the income, population or land area of the LGU/S concerned to
less than minimum requirements prescribed;

2. Income classification of the original LGU/S shall not fall below its current income
classification prior to division. (Sec.8 R.A.7160)

3. Plebiscite be held in LGUs affected (Sec.10 R.A. 7160)

4. Assets and liabilities of creation shall be equitably distributed between the LGUs
affected and new LGU. (R.A. 688)

93. When is an LGU deemed abolished? (LGC, Sec. 9)

- An LGU is deemed abolished when its income, population or land area has been
irreversibly reduced to less than the minimum standards prescribed for its creation,
as certified by the national agencies mentioned. (Sec. 9, R.A. 7160)

94. Who has the absolute power to alter and dissolve a municipal corporation? (LGC,
Sec. 6)

- SEC. 6. Authority to Create Local Government Units. - A local government unit

may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundaries substantially altered
 either by law enacted by Congress in the case of a province, city, municipality, or
any other political subdivision, or by ordinance passed by the sangguniang
panlalawigan or sangguniang panlungsod concerned in the case of a barangay
located within its territorial jurisdiction, subject to such limitations and requirements
prescribed in this Code.

95. How may the alteration or dissolution of a municipal corporation be made? (LGC,
Sec. 6)

- - As a general rule, the creation of a local government unit or its conversion from
one level to another level shall be based on verifiable indicators of viability and
projected capacity to provide services, to wit:

(a) Income. - It must be sufficient, based on acceptable standards, to provide for all
essential government facilities and services and special functions commensurate
with the size of its population, as expected of the local government unit
concerned;

(b) Population. - It shall be determined as the total number of inhabitants within the
territorial jurisdiction of the local government unit concerned; and

(c) Land Area. - It must be contiguous, unless it comprises two or more islands or is
separated by a local government unit independent of the others; properly
identified by metes and bounds with technical descriptions; and sufficient to
provide for such basic services and facilities to meet the requirements of its
populace. Compliance with the foregoing indicators shall be attested to by the
Department of Finance (DOF), the National Statistics Office (NSO), and the
Lands Management Bureau(LMB) of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources(DENR).

96. Under the law, how may an LGU, public places, streets, and structures be named?
(LGC, Sec. 13)

- SECTION 13. Naming of Local Government Units and Public Places, Streets and
Structures. – (a) The sangguniang panlalawigan may, in consultation with the
Philippine Historical Commission (PHC), change the name of the following within
its territorial jurisdiction:

(1) Component cities and municipalities, upon the recommendation of the

sanggunian concerned;

(2) Provincial roads, avenues, boulevards, thoroughfares, and bridges;

(3) Public vocational or technical schools and other post-secondary and tertiary
schools;
 (4) Provincial hospitals, health centers, and other health facilities; and

(5) Any other public place or building owned by the provincial government.

(b) The sanggunians of highly urbanized cities and of component cities whose charters
prohibit their voters from voting for provincial elective officials, hereinafter referred to
in this Code as independent component cities, may, in consultation with the Philippine
Historical Commission, change the name of the following within its territorial
jurisdiction:

(1) City barangays, upon the recommendation of the sangguniang barangay concerned;

(2) City roads, avenues, boulevards, thoroughfares, and bridges;

(3) Public elementary, secondary and vocational or technical schools, community

colleges and non-chartered colleges;

(4) City hospitals, health centers and other health facilities; and

(5) Any other public place or building owned by the city government.

(c) The sanggunians of component cities and municipalities may, in consultation with
the Philippine Historical Commission, change the name of the following within its
territorial jurisdiction:

(1) City and municipal barangays, upon recommendation of the sangguniang

barangay concerned;

(2) City, municipal and barangay roads, avenues, boulevards, thoroughfares, and
bridges;

(3) City and municipal public elementary, secondary and vocational or technical
schools, post-secondary and other tertiary schools;

(4) City and municipal hospitals, health centers and other health facilities; and

(5) Any other public place or building owned by the municipal government.

(d) None of the foregoing local government units, institutions, places, or buildings shall
be named after a living person, nor may a change of name be made unless for a justifiable
reason and, in any case, not oftener than once every ten (10) years. The name of a local
government unit or a public place, street or structure with historical, cultural, or ethnic
significance shall not be changed, unless by a unanimous vote of the sanggunian
 concerned and in consultation with the PHC. (

e) A change of name of a public school shall be made only upon the recommendation of
the local school board concerned.

(f) A change of name of public hospitals, health centers, and other health facilities shall
be made only upon the recommendation of the local health board concerned.

(g) The change of name of any local government unit shall be effective only upon
ratification in a plebiscite conducted for the purpose in the political unit directly affected.

(h) In any change of name, the Office of the President, the representative of the
legislative district concerned, and the Bureau of Posts shall be notified.

97. What are the limitations in naming LGU, public places, streets, and structures?
(LGC, Sec. 13)

- The limitation under LGC, Sec 13 are as follows:

(d) None of the foregoing local government units, institutions, places, or buildings
shall be named after a living person, nor may a change of name be made unless for a
justifiable reason and, in any case, not oftener than once every ten (10) years. The
name of a local government unit or a public place, street or structure with historical,
cultural, or ethnic significance shall not be changed, unless by a unanimous vote of
the sanggunian concerned and in consultation with the PHC.

(e) A change of name of a public school shall be made only upon the
recommendation of the local school board concerned.

(f) A change of name of public hospitals, health centers, and other health facilities
shall be made only upon the recommendation of the local health board concerned.

(g) The change of name of any local government unit shall be effective only upon
ratification in a plebiscite conducted for the purpose in the political unit directly
affected.

(h) In any change of name, the Office of the President, the representative of the
legislative district concerned, and the Bureau of Posts shall be notified.

98. What are the sources of power of municipal corporations?

- The sources of power of municipal corporations are:

1. Constitution
 2. Statutes (e.g. LGC)

3. Charter

4. Doctrine of right to Self‐Government (but only to those where it can be applied)

99. How may the provisions of the Local Government Code be interpreted? (LGC, Sec.
5)

- As a general rule, any doubt or question on a power of local government shall be

resolved in favor of devolution of powers and in favor of the LGU. (Sec.5 (a), LGC).
The exception is in case of tax measures enacted by local government, any doubts
shall be resolved strictly against the local government and liberally in favor of the
taxpayer. (Sec.5 (b), LGC)

100. Can LGUs exercise police power? (LGC, Sec. 16; Binay v. Domingo, G.R.
No. 92389, September 11, 1991)

- Yes. Municipal governments exercise this power under the general welfare clause.
Pursuant thereto they are clothed with authority to "enact such ordinances and issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out and discharge the responsibilities
conferred upon it by law, and such as shall be necessary and proper to provide for
the health, safety, comfort and convenience, maintain peace and order, improve
public morals, promote the prosperity and general welfare of the municipality and
the inhabitants thereof, and insure the protection of property therein. (Binay vs.
Domingo, 2011)

101. What is the General Welfare Clause? (LGC, Sec. 16)

- SECTION 16, LGC. General Welfare. - Every local government unit shall exercise
the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied there from, as well as
powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective
governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare.
Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall ensure
and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture,
promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology,
encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and
technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and
social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and
order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants.

102. What are the distinctions between General Legislative Power and Police
Power? (Mosqueda v. Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association, Inc.,
G.R. No. 189185, August 16, 2016)
 - Section 16 comprehends two branches of delegated powers, namely: the general
legislative power and the police power proper. General legislative power refers to
the power delegated by Congress to the local legislative body, or the Sangguniang
Panlungsod in the case of Dayao City, to enable the local legislative body to enact
ordinances and make regulations. This power is limited in that the enacted
ordinances must not be repugnant to law, and the power must be exercised to
effectuate and discharge the powers and duties legally conferred to the local
legislative body. The police power proper, on the other hand, authorizes the local
government unit to enact ordinances necessary and proper for the health and safety,
prosperity, morals, peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the local
government unit and its constituents, and for the protection of their property.
(Mosqueda vs. Pilipino Banana Growers, 2016)

103. What are the limitations on LGUs’ delegated legislative power?

- a. Express Grant by law (MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc., supra) -

Congress delegated police power to the local government units in the Local
Government Code of 1991. This delegation is found in Section 16 of the same Code,
known as the general welfare clause, viz: Sec. 16. General Welfare. — Every local
government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily
implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its
efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of
the general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government
units shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment
of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced
ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant
scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic
prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents,
maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their
inhabitants. (MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc, 2000)

- b. Must not be contrary to law (Lina v. Dizon-Paño G.R. No. 129093, August 30,
2001) - As a policy statement expressing the local government’s objection to the
lotto, such resolution is valid. This is part of the local government’s autonomy to air
its views which may be contrary to that of the national government’s. However, this
freedom to exercise contrary views does not mean that local governments may
actually enact ordinances that go against laws duly enacted by Congress. Given this
premise, the assailed resolution in this case could not and should not be interpreted
as a measure or ordinance prohibiting the operation of lotto. (Lina v. Dizon-Paño)

- c. Territoriality - (People v. Gozo, G.R. No. L-36409, October 26, 1973) -

Exercisable only within the territorial limits of the LGU, except for protection of
water supply (Sec 16, LGC)
 - d. Equal protection clause (People v. Gabriel, G.R. No. 18838, July 25, 1922) - The
interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class,
require the interference of the state.

- e. Due process clause (City of Manila v. Laguio, Jr., G.R. No. 118127, April 12,
2005) - The means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the
object sought to be accomplished and not duly oppressive.

104. What are the tests to determine the validity of police power measures? (NTC
v. Philippine Veterans Bank, G.R. Nos. 84132-33, December 10, 1990; Mosqueda v.
Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association, Inc., supra; Social Justice
Society v. Atienza, G.R. No. 156052, February 3, 2008; City of Bacolod v. Phuture
Visions Co., Inc., G.R. No. 190289, January 17, 2018; Mayor Cayabyab v. Dimson,
G.R. No. 223862, July 10, 2017)

- Our courts have laid down the test to determine the validity of a police measure as
follows: (1) the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a
particular class, requires its exercise; and (2) the means employed are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon
individuals (National Development Company v. Philippine Veterans Bank, 1990)

105. What is the obligation of LGU with respect provisions of basic services and
facilities? (LGC, Sec. 17)

- LGC, SECTION 17. Basic Services and Facilities. – (a) Local government units
shall endeavor to be self-reliant and shall continue exercising the powers and
discharging the duties and functions currently vested upon them. They shall also
discharge the functions and responsibilities of national agencies and offices
devolved to them pursuant to this Code. Local government units shall likewise
exercise such other powers and discharge such other functions and responsibilities as
are necessary, appropriate, or incidental to efficient and effective provision of the
basic services and facilities enumerated herein.

106. How may the LGU exercise the power of expropriation? (LGC, Sec. 19; City
of Manila v. Chinese Community, G.R. No. L-14355, October 31, 1919;
Municipality of Parañaque v. V.M. Realty Corp., G.R. No. 127820, July 20, 1998)

- LGC, SECTION 19. Eminent Domain. – A local government unit may, through its
 chief executive and acting pursuant to an ordinance, exercise the power of eminent
domain for public use, or purpose or welfare for the benefit of the poor and the
landless, upon payment of just compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the
Constitution and pertinent laws: Provided, however, That the power of eminent
domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite offer has been previously
made to the owner, and such offer was not accepted: Provided, further, That the local
government unit may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing of
the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit with the proper court of at
least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the
current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated: Provided, finally, That, the
amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be determined by the proper
court, based on the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property.

107. What are the requisites for the valid exercise of the power to expropriate?

- The requisites for the valid exercise of the power to expropriate by the LGU are the
following:

1. An Ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief
executive, in behalf of the local government unit, to exercise the power of eminent
domain or pursue expropriation proceeding over a particular property;

2. For Public use, purpose or welfare of for the benefit of the poor or landless;

3. Payment of Just Compensation; and

4. A valid and definite Offer has been previously made to the owner of the property
sought to be expropriated, but said offer was not accepted. (Municipality of
Paranaque vs. V.M. Realty Corporation G.R. No. 127820. July 20, 1998)

108. Should the power of expropriation be exercised through an ordinance?

(Moday v. CA, G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997; LGC, Sec. 19)

- Yes, the power of expropriation by LGU needs to be exercised through an ordinance

as provided by the express provision in Section 19 of the LGC.

109. What is just compensation? (Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 146587, July 2, 2002)

- As held by the Supreme Court in the case of Republic vs. CA, just compensation
means the is considered to be the sum equivalent to the market value of the property,
broadly described to be the price fixed by the seller in open market in the usual and
 ordinary course of legal action and competition or the fair value of the property as
between one who receives, and one who desires to sell, it fixed at the time of the
actual taking by the government.

110. How may just compensation be determined? (City of Cebu v. Dedamo, G.R.
No. 142971, May 7, 2002)

- As held in the case of City of Cebu vs. Dedamo, just compensation is determined, as
a general rule, by the value of the property as of the date of the filing of the
complaint. However, it admits of an exception, that is, where the Court fixed the
value of the property as of the date it was taken and not at the date of the
commencement of the expropriation proceedings.

111. Can the LGU take immediate possession of the property intended to be
expropriated? (Province of Camarines Sur v. CA, G.R. No. 103125, May 17, 1993)

- Yes, the LGU can take immediate possession of the property intended to be
expropriated when such taking is for the purpose of public use. The Supreme Court
in the case of Province of Camarines Sur vs. CA held that it is the legislative branch
of the local government unit that shall determine whether the use of the property
sought to be expropriated shall be public, the same being an expression of legislative
policy. The courts defer to such legislative determination and will intervene only
when a particular undertaking has no real or substantial relation to the public use.

112. Where do private lands rank in order or priority for purposes of

expropriation? (Estate or Heirs of the Late Ex-Justice Jose B.L. Reyes v. City of
Manila, G.R. No. 132431, February 13, 2004)

- The Supreme Court ruled that private lands rank last in the order of priority for
purposes of socialized housing. In the same vein, expropriation proceedings are to be
resorted to only after the other modes of acquisition have been exhausted.

113. Can LGUs exercise power of taxation? (1987 PH Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 5;
LGC, Sec.18)

- Yes, LGUs can exercise power of taxation. The following provisions of the 1987
Constitution and LGC are pertinent: Art. X, Sec. 5 1987 Constitution: “Each local
government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to
 levy taxes, fees and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the
Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy.”

Section 18, LGC: Power to Generate and Apply Resources. - Local government
units shall have the power and authority to establish an organization that shall be
responsible for the efficient and effective implementation of their development
plans, program objectives and priorities; to create their own sources of revenues and
to levy taxes, fees, and charges which shall accrue exclusively for their use and
disposition and which shall be retained by them; to have a just share in national taxes
which shall be automatically and directly released to them without need of any
further action; to have an equitable share in the proceeds from the utilization and
development of the national wealth and resources within their respective territorial
jurisdictions including sharing the same with the inhabitants by way of direct
benefits; to acquire, develop, lease, encumber, alienate, or otherwise dispose of real
or personal property held by them in their proprietary capacity and to apply their
resources and assets for productive, developmental, or welfare purposes, in the
exercise or furtherance of their governmental or proprietary powers and functions
and thereby ensure their development into self-reliant communities and active
participants in the attainment of national goals.

114. What are the limitations to the LGUs exercise of power of taxation?
(Batangas City v. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp., G.R. No. 187631, July 8, 2015;
Icard v. City Council of Baguio, G.R. No. L-1281, May 31, 1949)

- The Surpreme Court ruled in certain cases that the limitations to the LGUs exercise
of power of taxation are:

1. LGUs’ power to tax must be delegated by Congress and must be exercised within
the guidelines and limitations that Congress may provide;

2. Section 130 of the LGC provides for the following fundamental principles
governing the taxing powers of LGUs:

a. Taxation shall be uniform in each LGU;

b. Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall:

i. be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayer’s ability to

pay;
ii. be levied and collected only for public purposes;
iii. not be unjust, excessive, oppressive or confiscatory; and
iv. not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in the
restraint of trade
 c. The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall in no
case be left to any private person;

d. The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of the LGC shall inure solely
to the benefit of, and be subject to the disposition by, the LGU levying the tax,
fee, charge or other imposition unless otherwise specifically provided by the
LGC; and

e. Each LGU shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive system of taxation.

3. Section 133 of the LGC provides for the common limitations on the taxing powers of
LGUs. Among the common limitations on the taxing powers of LGUs under Section
133 of the LGC is paragraph (h) which states: SECTION 133. Common Limitations on
the Taxing Powers of Local Government Units. – Unless otherwise provided herein, the
exercise of taxing powers of provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays shall not
extend to the levy of the following: x x x x (h) Excise taxes on articles enumerated under
the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and taxes, fees or charges on
petroleum products.

115. May LGUs power to raise revenues be limited by an administrative order? (Philippine
Petroleum Corp. v. Municipality of Pililia, G.R. No. 90776, June 3, 1991)

- No, the LGUs’ power to raise revenues cannot be limited by an administrative order.
The Supreme Court ruled that under Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution,
only guidelines and limitations that may be established by Congress can define and
limit the power to tax by local governments.

116. What are the fundamental principles of local taxation? (LGC, Sec. 130)

- SECTION 130. Fundamental Principles. - The following fundamental principles

shall govern the exercise of the taxing and other revenue-raising powers of local
government units:

(1) Taxation shall be uniform in each local government unit;

(2) Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall:

(a) be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayer's ability to pay;

(b) be levied and collected only for public purposes;

 (c) not be adjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory;

(d) not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in restraint
of trade;

(3) The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall in no
case be let to any private person;

(4) The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of this Code shall inure
solely to the benefit of, and be subject to disposition by, the local government unit
levying the tax, fee, charge or other imposition unless otherwise specifically
provided herein; and,

(5) Each local government unit shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive
system of taxation.

117. Do LGUs have the authority to tax national government? (Basco v. PAGCOR, supra;
MIAA v. CA, G.R. No. 155650, July 20, 2006)

- No, LGUs have no authority to tax national government. In Basco v. PAGCOR, the
Supreme Court rule: (a) The City of Manila, being a mere Municipal corporation has
no inherent right to impose tax. Its "power to tax" therefore must always yield to a
legislative act which is superior having been passed upon by the state itself which
has the "inherent power to tax". (b) The Charter of the City of Manila is subject to
control by Congress. It should be stressed that "municipal corporations are mere
creatures of Congress" which has the power to "create and abolish municipal
corporations" due to its "general legislative powers. Congress, therefore, has the
power of control over Local governments. And if Congress can grant the City of
Manila the power to tax certain matters, it can also provide for exemptions or even
take back the power. (d) Local governments have no power to tax instrumentalities
of the National Government. PAGCOR is a government owned or controlled
corporation with an original charter, PD 1869.

This doctrine emanates from the "supremacy" of the National Government over local
governments.

118. Are LGUs entitled to share of national internal revenue? (LGC, Secs. 284 and 285)

- Yes. SECTION 284. Allotment of Internal Revenue Taxes. - Local government units
shall have a share in the national internal revenue taxes based on the collection of the
third fiscal year preceding the current fiscal year as follows:

(a) On the first year of the effectivity of this Code, thirty percent (30%);
(b) On the second year, thirty-five percent (35%); and

(c) On the third year and thereafter, forty percent (40%).

Provided, That in the event that the national government incurs an unmanageable
public sector deficit, the President of the Philippines is hereby authorized, upon the
recommendation of Secretary of Finance, Secretary of Interior and Local
Government and Secretary of Budget and Management, and subject to consultation
with the presiding officers of both Houses of Congress and the presidents of the liga,
to make the necessary adjustments in the internal revenue allotment of local
government units but in no case shall the allotment be less than thirty percent (30%)
of the collection of national internal revenue taxes of the third fiscal year preceding
the current fiscal year: Provided, further That in the first year of the effectivity of
this Code, the local government units shall, in addition to the thirty percent (30%)
internal revenue allotment which shall include the cost of devolved functions for
essential public services, be entitled to receive the amount equivalent to the cost of
devolved personal services.

SECTION 285. Allocation to Local Government Units. - The share of local

government units in the internal revenue allotment shall be allocated in the following
manner:

(a) Provinces - Twenty-three percent (23%);

(b) Cities - Twenty-three percent (23%);

(c) Municipalities - Thirty-four percent (34%); and

(d) Barangays - Twenty percent (20%) Provided, however, That the share of each
province, city, and municipality shall be determined on the basis of the following
formula:

(a) Population - Fifty percent (50%);

(b) Land Area - Twenty-five percent (25%); and
(c) Equal sharing - Twenty-five percent (25%

Provided, further, That the share of each Barangay with a population of not less than
one hundred (100) inhabitants shall not be less than Eighty thousand pesos
(P=80,000.00) per annum chargeable against the twenty percent (20%) share of the
Barangay from the internal revenue allotment, and the balance to be allocated on the
basis of the following formula:

(a) On the first year of the effectivity of this Code:

(1) Population - Forty percent (40%); and

 (2) Equal Sharing - Sixty percent (60%)

(b) On the second year:

(1) Population - Fifty percent (50%); and

(2) Equal Sharing - Fifty percent (50%)

(c) On the third year and thereafter:

(1) Population - Sixty percent (60%); and

(2) Equal Sharing - Forty percent (40%).

Provided, finally, That the financial requirements of Barangays created by local

government units after the effectivity of this Code shall be the responsibility of the
local government unit concerned.

119. What should be the basis of LGUs IRA/ National Tax Allotment (NTA)? (Mandanas
et.al. v Ochoa, Garcia Jr. v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 208488, July 3, 2018; April 10, 2019)

- The share of the LGUs, heretofore known as the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA),
has been regularly released to the LGUs. According to the implementing rules and
regulations of the LGC, the IRA is determined on the basis of the actual collections
of the National Internal Revenue Taxes (NIRTs) as certified by the Bureau of
Internal Revenue (BIR). The “just share” of the LGUs should be based on all
national taxes collected on "the third fiscal year preceding."

120. Does the DOJ Secretary have the power to review and revoke legality of tax
ordinances?

- Yes, the DOJ Secretary have the power to review and revoke legality of tax
ordinances. Under Section 187of LGC, the procedure for approval of local tax
ordinances and revenue measures shall be in accordance with the provisions of this
Code: Provided, That public hearings shall be conducted for the purpose prior to the
enactment thereof: Provided, further, That any question on the constitutionality or
legality of tax ordinances or revenue measures may be raised on appeal within thirty
(30) days from the effectivity thereof to the Secretary of Justice who shall render a
decision within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of the appeal: Provided,
however, That such appeal shall not have the effect of suspending the effectivity of
the ordinance and the accrual and payment of the tax, fee, or charge levied therein:
Provided, finally, That within thirty (30) days after receipt of the decision or the
lapse of the sixty-day period without the Secretary of Justice acting upon the appeal,
 the aggrieved party may file appropriate proceedings with a court of competent
jurisdiction.

121. What are the corporate powers of LGUs?

- The corporate powers of LDUs are:

(1) To have continuous succession in its corporate name;

(2) To sue and be sued;
(3) To have and use a corporate seal;
(4) To acquire and convey real or personal property;
(5) To enter into contracts; and
(6) To exercise such other powers as are granted to corporations, subject to the
limitations provided in this Code and other laws.

Local government units may continue using, modify, or change their existing corporate
seals: Provided, That newly established local government units or those without
corporate seals may create their own corporate seals which shall be registered
with the Department of the Interior and Local Government: Provided, further, That
any change of corporate seal shall also be registered as provided herein. (c) Unless
otherwise provided in this Code, contract may be entered into by the local chief executive
in behalf of the local government unit without prior authorization by the Sanggunian
concerned. A legible copy of such contract shall be posted at a conspicuous place in the
provincial capitol or the city, municipal or Barangay hall. (d) Local government units
shall enjoy full autonomy in the exercise of their proprietary functions and in the
management of their economic enterprises, subject to the limitations provided in this
Code and other applicable laws.

122. Can LGUs acquire properties?

- Yes. The property of provinces, cities and municipalities is divided into property for
public use and patrimonial property (Art. 423, Civil Code).

As to what consists of property for public use, Article 424 of Civil Code states:
"ART. 424. Property for public use, in the provinces, cities and municipalities,
consists of the provincial roads, city streets, the squares, fountains, public waters,
promenades, and public works for public service paid for by said provinces, cities or
municipalities."

“All other property possessed by any of them is patrimonial and shall be governed
by this Code, without prejudice to the provisions of special laws."
 When it is already withdrawn from public use, the property then becomes patrimonial
property of the local government unit concerned. It is only then that the respondent
municipality can "use or convey them for any purpose for which other real property
belonging to the local unit concerned might be lawfully used or conveyed" in
accordance with the last sentence of Section 10, Chapter II of Blg. 333, known as Local
Government Code.

123. Can LGUs enter into a contract? What are the requirements in the exercise of such
power?

- Yes. For efficient, effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the
general welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this
Code, the municipal mayor shall upon authorization by the Sangguniang bayan,
represent the municipality in all its business transactions and sign on its behalf all
bonds, contracts, and obligations, and such other documents made pursuant to law or
ordinance;

124. What is an ultra vires act?

- An ultra vires act is one committed outside the object for which a corporation is
created as defined by the law of its organization and therefore beyond the powers
conferred upon it by law. There are two (2) types of ultra vires acts. There is a
distinction between an act utterly beyond the jurisdiction of a municipal corporation
and the irregular exercise of a basic power under the legislative grant in matters not
in themselves jurisdictional. The former is ultra vires in the primary sense and void;
the latter, ultra vires only in a secondary sense which does not preclude ratification
or the application of the doctrine of estoppel in the interest of equity and essential
justice.

In other words, an act which is outside of the municipality’s jurisdiction is

considered as a void ultra vires act, while an act attended only by an irregularity but
remains within the municipality’s power is considered as an ultra vires act subject to
ratification and/or validation. To the former belongs municipal contracts which
(a) are entered into beyond the express, implied or inherent powers of the
local government unit; and (b) do not comply with the substantive requirements
of law e.g., when expenditure of public funds is to be made, there must be an actual
appropriation and certificate of availability of funds; while to the latter belongs those
which (a) are entered into by the improper department, board, officer of agent; and
(b)do not comply with the formal requirements of a written contract e.g., the Statute
of Frauds
125. What are the two kinds of ultra vires act?

- If the action by the municipality is considered ultra vires, a court must consider
whether the conduct is ultra vires in the primary sense, or ultra vires in the secondary
sense:

There is a distinction between an act utterly beyond the jurisdiction of a municipal

corporation and the irregular exercise of a basic power under the legislative grant in
matters not in themselves jurisdictional. The former are ultra vires in the primary sense
and void; the latter, ultra vires only in a secondary sense which does not preclude
ratification or the application of the doctrine of estoppel in the interest of equity and
essential justice.

126. May the doctrine of estoppel be applied to municipal corporations? (Favis v.

Municipality of Sabangan, G.R. No. L-26522, February 27, 1969)

- No, the doctrine of estoppel cannot be applied as against a municipal

corporation to validate a contract which it has no power to make, or which it
is authorized to make only under prescribed conditions, within prescribed
limitations, or in a prescribed mode or manner, although the corporation has
accepted the benefits thereof and the other party has fully performed his part
of the agreement, or has expended large sums in preparation for performance.
A reason frequently assigned for this rule is that to apply the doctrine of estoppel
against a municipality in such case would be to enable it to do indirectly what it
cannot do directly. Also, where a contract is violative of public policy, the
municipality executing it cannot be estopped to assert the invalidity on the ground;
nor can it be estopped to assert the invalidity of a contract which has ceded away,
controlled, or embarrassed its legislative or governmental powers.

127. Distinguish void ultra vires and ultra vires irregularity. (Land Bank of the Philippines
v. Cacayuran, supra)

- An act which is outside of the municipality's jurisdiction is considered as a void ultra

vires act, while an act attended only by an irregularity but remains within the
municipality's power is considered as an ultra vires act subject to ratification and/or
validation. To the former belongs municipal contracts which (a) are entered into
beyond the express, implied or inherent powers of the local government unit; and (b)
do not comply with the substantive requirements of law e.g., when expenditure of
public funds is to be made, there must be an actual appropriation and certificate of
availability of funds; while to the latter belongs those which (a) are entered into
by the improper department, board, officer of agent; and (b)do not comply
with the formal requirements of a written contract e.g., the Statute of Frauds.

128. May a city mayor enter into a contract? (Lao v. LGU of Cagayan de Oro City, G.R.
No. 187869, September 13, 2017; City Council of Cebu v. Cuizon, G.R. No. L-28972,
October 31, 1972)

- Yes, but the city mayor's authority to bind the city to obligations must emanate from
the City Council. The requirement of the sangguniang panlungsod's prior authority is
a measure of check and balance on the powers of the city mayor: Yet this is
obviously not the effect Congress had in mind when it required, as a condition to the
local chief executive's representation of the local government unit in business
transactions, the prior authorization of the sanggunian concerned. The requirement
was deliberately added as a measure of check and balance, to temper the authority of
the local chief executive, and in recognition of the fact that the corporate powers of
the local government unit are wielded as much by its chief executive as by its
council.

129. May an LGU be held liable for breach of contractual obligations? (City of Manila v.
IAC, G.R. No. 71159, November 15, 1989)

- Yes. Municipal corporations are subject to be sued upon contracts and in tort. The
rule of law is a general one, that the superior or employer must answer civilly for the
negligence or want of skill of its agent or servant in the course or line of his
employment, by which another who is free from contributory fault, is injured.
Municipal corporations under the conditions herein stated, fall within tile operation
of this rule of law, and are liable accordingly, to civil actions for damages when the
requisite elements of liability co-exist.

130. In LGUs exercise of power to sue and be sued, may LGU be represented by a private
lawyer? ((LGC, Sec. 481 par. b, 3[i])

- Yes. The legal officer, the chief legal counsel of the local government unit, shall take
charge of the office of legal services and shall: (1) Formulate measures for the
consideration of the sanggunian and provide legal assistance and support to the
governor or mayor, as the case may be, in carrying out the delivery of basic services
and provisions of adequate facilities as provided for under Section 17 of LGC.

131. Are there exceptions? (Ramos v. CA, G.R. No. 99425, March 3, 1997; Municipality of
Pililia v. CA, G.R. No. 105909, June 28, 1994)

- Yes. The exceptions are:

a. A municipality may expressly adopt the work already performed in good faith by
such private lawyer, which work is beneficial to it, provided:

i. That no injustice is thereby heaped on the adverse party; and

ii. That no compensation in any guise is paid for by the municipality to the
 private lawyer.
b. When the Provincial fiscal is disqualified to represent the municipality and such
fact of disqualification must appear on the record.

132. Do LGUs have the power to reclassify lands? (LGC, Sec. 20, par. A)

- Yes. Section 20. Reclassification of Lands. -(a) A city or municipality may,

through an ordinance passed by the sanggunian after conducting public
hearings for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands and
provide for the manner of their utilization or disposition in the following
cases: (1) when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture or (2) where
the land shall have substantially greater economic value for residential,
commercial, or industrial purposes, as determined by the sanggunian
concerned: Provided, That such reclassification shall be limited to the following
percentage of the total agricultural land area at the time of the passage of the
ordinance:

(1) For highly urbanized and independent component cities, fifteen percent (15%);

(2) For component cities and first to the third class municipalities, ten percent
(10%); and

(3) For fourth to sixth class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided, further, That
agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant to Republic
Act Numbered Sixty-six hundred fifty-seven (R.A. No. 6657). otherwise known
as "The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law", shall not be affected by the said
reclassification and the conversion of such lands into other purposes shall be
governed by Section 65 of said Act.

133. Do LGUs need to obtain the approval of the Department of Agriculture to convert or
reclassify lands? (Fortich v. Corona,G.R. No. 131457,November 17, 1998)

- No. "Nor can procedural lapses in the manner of identifying/reclassifying the

subject property for agro-industrial purposes be allowed to defeat the very purpose
of the law granting autonomy to local government units in the management of their
local affairs. Stated more simply, the language of Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160,
supra, is clear and affords no room for any other interpretation. By unequivocal
legal mandate, it grants local government units autonomy in their affairs including
the power to convert portions of their agricultural lands and provide for the manner
of their utilization and disposition to enable them to attain their fullest development
as self-reliant communities.
134. What are the requisites of road’s permanent or temporary closure?

- SEC. 21. Closure and Opening of Roads.-

(a) A local government unit may, pursuant to an ordinance, permanently or

temporarily close or open any local road, alley, park, or square falling within its
jurisdiction: Provided, however, That in case of permanent closure, such ordinance
must be approved by at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the members of the sanggunian,
and when necessary, an adequate substitute for the public facility that is subject to
closure is provided.

(b) No such way or place or any part thereof shall be permanently closed without
making provisions for the maintenance of public safety therein. A property thus
permanently withdrawn from public use may be used or conveyed for any purpose
for which other real property belonging to the local government unit concerned may
be lawfully used or conveyed: Provided, however, That no freedom park shall be
closed permanently without provision for its transfer or relocation to a new site.

(c) Any national or local road, alley, park, or square may be temporarily closed
during an actual emergency, or fiesta celebrations, public rallies, agricultural or
industrial fairs, or an undertaking of public works and highways,
telecommunications, and waterworks projects, the duration of which shall be
specified by the local chief executive concerned in a written order: Provided,
however, That no national or local road, alley, park, or square shall set temporarily
closed for athletic, cultural, or civic activities not officially sponsored, recognized, or
approved by the local government unit concerned.

135. Does the local chief executive have the authority to secure and negotiate grants?

- Yes. SEC. 23. Authority to Negotiate and Secure Grants. - Local chief executives
may, upon authority of the sanggunian, negotiate and secure financial grants or
donations in kind, in support of the basic services or facilities enumerated under
Section 17 hereof, from local and foreign assistance agencies without necessity of
securing clearance or approval therefor from any department, agency, or office of
the national government or from any higher local government unit: Provided, That
projects financed by such grants or assistance with national security implications
shall be approved by the national agency concerned: Provided, further, That when
such national agency fails to act on the request for approval within thirty (30) days
from receipt thereof, the same shall be deemed approved. The local chief executive
shall, within thirty (30) days upon signing of such grant agreement or deed of
donation, report the nature, amount, and terms of such assistance to both Houses of
Congress and the President.
 SEC. 455.Chief Executive; Powers, Duties and Compensation. (b) For efficient,
effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the general welfare of
the city and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the city mayor shall

(1) Exercise general supervision and control over all programs, projects, services,
and activities of the city government, and in this connection, shall:

(vi) Represent the city in all its business transactions and sign in its behalf all bonds,
contracts, and obligations, and such other documents upon authority of the
sangguniang panlungsod or pursuant to law or ordinance.

134. What are the requisites of road’s permanent or temporary closure?

- SEC. 21. Closure and Opening of Roads

(a) A local government unit may, pursuant to an ordinance, permanently or

temporarily close or open any local road, alley, park, or square falling within its
jurisdiction: Provided, however, That in case of permanent closure, such ordinance
must be approved by at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the members of the sanggunian,
and when necessary, an adequate substitute for the public facility that is subject to
closure is provided.

(b) No such way or place or any part thereof shall be permanently closed without
making provisions for the maintenance of public safety therein. A property thus
permanently withdrawn from public use may be used or conveyed for any purpose
for which other real property belonging to the local government unit concerned may
be lawfully used or conveyed: Provided, however, That no freedom park shall be
closed permanently without provision for its transfer or relocation to a new site.

(c) Any national or local road, alley, park, or square may be temporarily closed
during an actual emergency, or fiesta celebrations, public rallies, agricultural or
industrial fairs, or an undertaking of public works and highways,
telecommunications, and waterworks projects, the duration of which shall be
specified by the local chief executive concerned in a written order: Provided,
however, That no national or local road, alley, park, or square shall set temporarily
closed for athletic, cultural, or civic activities not officially sponsored, recognized, or
approved by the local government unit concerned.

135. Does the local chief executive have the authority to secure and negotiate grants?

- Yes. SEC. 23.Authority to Negotiate and Secure Grants.-Local chief executives may,
upon authority of the sanggunian, negotiate and secure financial grants or donations
 in kind, in support of the basic services or facilities enumerated under Section 17
hereof, from local and foreign assistance agencies without necessity of securing
clearance or approval therefor from any department, agency, or office of the national
government or from any higher local government unit: Provided, That projects
financed by such grants or assistance with national security implications shall be
approved by the national agency concerned: Provided, further, That when such
national agency fails to act on the request for approval within thirty (30) days from
receipt thereof, the same shall be deemed approved. The local chief executive shall,
within thirty (30) days upon signing of such grant agreement or deed of donation,
report the nature, amount, and terms of such assistance to both Houses of Congress
and the President.

SEC. 455.Chief Executive; Powers, Duties and Compensation

(b) For efficient, effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the
general welfare of the city and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code,
the city mayor shall:

(1) Exercise general supervision and control over all programs, projects, services,
and activities of the city government, and in this connection, shall:
(vi) Represent the city in all its business transactions and sign in its behalf
all bonds, contracts, and obligations, and such other documents upon
authority of the sangguniang panlungsod or pursuant to law or ordinance.

136. Do LGUs exercise legislative power?

- Yes. SEC. 48, LGC, Local Legislative Power. - Local legislative power shall be
exercised by the sangguniang panlalawigan for the province; the sangguniang
panlungsod for the city; the sangguniang bayan for the municipality; and the
sangguniang barangay for the barangay.

137. Who may exercise local legislative power?

- SEC. 48. Local Legislative Power.-Local legislative power shall be exercised by the
sangguniang panlalawigan for the province; the sangguniang panlungsod for the
city; the sangguniang bayan for the municipality; and the sangguniang barangay for
the barangay.

138. Distinguish ordinance from resolution.

- A municipal ordinance is different from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but a

resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body
 on a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a general and permanent character, but
a resolution is temporary in nature. Additionally, the two are enacted differently --a
third reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided
otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members.

139. What are the requisites of a valid ordinance?

- For an ordinance to be valid, it must not only be within the corporate powers of the
municipality to enact but must also be passed according to the procedure prescribed
by law, and must be in consonance with certain well established and basic principles
of a substantive nature. These principles require that a municipal ordinance

(1) must not contravene the Constitution or any statute

(2) must not be unfair or oppressive

(3) must not be partial or discriminatory

(4) must not prohibit but may regulate trade

(5) must be general and consistent with public policy, and

(6) must not be unreasonable.

140. Who are allowed to be presiding officers in the respective Sanggunian?

- SEC. 49. Presiding Officer. - (a) The vice-governor shall be the presiding officer of
the sangguniang panlalawigan; the city vice-mayor, of the sangguniang panlungsod;
the municipal vice-mayor, of the sangguniang bayan; and the punong barangay, of
the sangguniang barangay. The presiding officer shall vote only to break a tie.

141. How often should a regular session be conducted?

- Regular sessions of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panglungsod, and

Sangguniang Bayan must be conducted at least once a week. The regular session of
the Sangguniang Barangay must be conducted at least twice a month.

142. When may a special session be conducted? (LGC, Sec. 52, par. d)
 - When public interest so demands, special sessions may be called by the local chief
executive or by a majority of the members of the sanggunian.

143. Should all sessions be opened to the public? LGC, Sec. 52, par. c)

- Yes. All sanggunian sessions shall be open to the public unless a closed-door session
is ordered by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members present, there being a
quorum, in the public interest or for reasons of security, decency, or morality. No
two (2) sessions, regular or special, may be held in a single day.

144. When is there a quorum? (LGC, Sec. 53, par. A)

- A majority of all the members of the sanggunian who have been elected and
qualified shall constitute a quorum to transact official business. Should a question of
quorum be raised during a session, the presiding officer shall immediately proceed to
call the roll of the members and thereafter announce the results.

145. When is there no quorum? (LGC, Sec. 53, par. [b][c])

- Where there is no quorum, the presiding officer may declare a recess until such
time as a quorum is constituted, or a majority of the members present may
adjourn from day to day and may compel the immediate attendance of any member
absent without justifiable cause by designating a member of the sanggunian to be
assisted by a member or members of the police force assigned in the
territorial jurisdiction of the local government unit concerned, to arrest the absent
member and present him at the session. If there is still no quorum despite the
enforcement of the immediately preceding subsection, no business shall be
transacted. The presiding officer, upon proper motion duly approved by the members
present, shall then declare the session adjourned for lack of quorum.

146. What are the steps in the approval of ordinance? (LGC, Secs. 54 and 55)

- a. Every ordinance enacted by the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang

panlungsod, or sangguniang bayan shall be presented to the provincial governor or
city or municipal mayor, as the case may be. If the local chief executive concerned
approves the same, he shall affix his signature on each and every page thereof;
otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the sanggunian,
which may proceed to reconsider the same. The sanggunian concerned may override
the veto of the local chief executive by two-thirds (2/3) vote of all its members,
 thereby making the ordinance or resolution effective for all legal intents and
purposes.

(b) The veto shall be communicated by the local chief executive concerned to the
sanggunian within fifteen (15) days in the case of a province, and ten (10) days in
the case of a city or a municipality; otherwise, the ordinance shall be deemed
approved as if he had signed it.

(c) Ordinances enacted by the sangguniang barangay shall, upon approval by the
majority of all its members, be signed by the punong barangay.

147. Can a Barangay Chairman veto an ordinance? (LGC, Sec. 54, par. c)

- (a) The local chief executive may veto any ordinance of the sanggunian
panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or sanggunian bayan on the ground that it is
ultra vires or prejudicial to the public welfare, stating his reasons therefor in writing.

(b) The local chief executive, except the punong barangay, shall have the power to
veto any particular item or items of an appropriations ordinance, an ordinance or
resolution adopting a local development plan and public investment program, or an
ordinance directing the payment of money or creating liability. In such a case, the
veto shall not affect the item or items which are not objected to. The vetoed item or
items shall not take effect unless the sanggunian overrides the veto in the manner
herein provided; otherwise, the item or items in the appropriations ordinance of the
previous year corresponding to those vetoed, if any, shall be deemed reenacted.

(c) The local chief executive may veto an ordinance or resolution only once. The
sanggunian may override the veto of the local chief executive concerned by two-
thirds (2/3) vote of all its members, thereby making the ordinance effective even
without the approval of the local chief executive concerned.

148. How may the Sangguniang Panlalawigan review the ordinances enacted or resolutions
issued by component city and municipality? (LGC,Sec. 56, par. a and c)

- (a) Within three (3) days after approval, the secretary to the sanggunian
panlungsod or sangguniang bayan shall forward to the sangguniang
panlalawigan for review, copies of approved ordinances and the resolutions
approving the local development plans and public investment programs
formulated by the local development councils.

(c) If the sangguniang panlalawigan finds that such an ordinance or resolution is

beyond the power conferred upon the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang
 bayan concerned, it shall declare such ordinance or resolution invalid in whole or in
part. The sangguniang panlalawigan shall enter its action in the minutes and shall
advise the corresponding city or municipal authorities of the action it has taken.

149. When shall an ordinance or resolution take effect? (LGC, Sec. 59, par. a)

- (a) Unless otherwise stated in the ordinance or the resolution approving the local
development plan and public investment program, the same shall take effect after ten
(10) days from the date a copy thereof is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of
the provincial capitol or city, municipal, or barangay hall, as the case may be, and in
at least two (2) other conspicuous places in the local government unit concerned.

150. May an LGU exercise the power to grant license? (Pedro v. provincial Board of Rizal,
G.R. No. 34163, September 18, 1931)

- Yes, an LGU may exercise the power to grant license. The issuance of licenses is
presumed to be regulatory rather than for raising of revenues unless the contrary
appears from the language of the law. A license authorizing the operation of a
certain business is not property of which the holder may not be deprived without due
process of the law, but a mere privilege which may be revoked when the public
interest so requires.

151. What are the kinds of municipal license? (G.A.Cunjieng v. Patstone, G.R. No. L-
16254, February 21, 1922)

- 1. Licenses for the regulation of useful occupations –based on exercise of police

power.

2. Licenses for the regulation or restriction of non-useful occupations -Licenses for

non-useful occupations are also incidental to the police power and the right to exact
a fee may be implied from the power to license regulate, but in fixing the amount of
the license fees the municipal corporations are allowed a much wider discretion in
this class of cases than in the former, and aside from applying the well-known legal
principle that muncipal ordinances must not be unreasonable, oppressive, or
tyrannical, courts have, as a general rule, declined to interfere with such discretion.

3. Licenses for revenue only. -It rests upon the taxing power as distinguished from
the police power, and the power of the municipality to exact such fees must be
expressly granted by character or statute and is not to be implied from the conferred
power to license and regulate merely.
152. Distinguish power to tax and power to license.

- Power to tax is an exercise of the state’s taxing power while power to license is an
exercise of police power.
The purpose of the tax is to generate revenues while license fees are imposed for
regulatory purposes which means that it must only be of sufficient amount to include
expenses in issuing a license, cost of necessary inspection or police surveillance, etc.
The primary purpose of tax is to generate revenue, and regulation is merely
incidental while in license, regulation is the primary purpose. The fact that incidental
revenue is also obtained does not make the imposition a tax.

153. What is a local initiative? (LGC, Secs. 120 and 121)

- Section 120. Local Initiative Defined. - Local initiative is the legal process whereby
the registered voters of a local government unit may directly propose, enact, or
amend any ordinance.

Section 121.Who May Exercise. - The power of local initiative and referendum may
be exercised by all registered voters of the provinces, cities, municipalities, and
barangays.

154. What is the procedure for the exercise of local initiative? (LGC, Secs. 122 and 123)

- 1. Number of voters who should file petition with the Sanggunian concerned:

1. Province and cities –not less than 1000 registered voters

2. Municipality –at least 100 registered voters

3. Barangay –at least 50 registered voters

2. The sanggunian concerned has 30 days to act on the petition. If the

sanggunian does not take any favorable action, the proponents may invoke the
powers of initiative, giving notice to sanggunian.

3. Proponents will have the following number of days to collect required number
of signatures

1. Provinces and cities –90 days

2. Municipalities –60 days
 3. Barangay –30 days

4. Signing of petition in a public place, before the election registrar or his

designated representatives, in the presence of a representative of the proponent
and of the sanggunian concerned.

5. Date of initiative is set by COMELEC if the required number of signatures has

been obtained (LGC, Sec. 122)

155. What are the limitations in the exercise of local initiative? (LGC, Sec. 124)

- The limitations in the exercise of local initiative are:

1. It shall not be exercised for more than once a year.

2. It shall extend only to subjects or matters which are within the legal powers of the
sanggunian to enact.

3. If at any time before the initiative is held, the sanggunian concerned adopts in toto
the proposition presented and the local chief executive approves the same, the
initiative shall be canceled. However, those against such action may, if they so
desire, apply for initiative in the manner herein provided (LGC, Sec. 124).

156. What is a local referendum? (LGC, Sec. 126)

Under Section 126 of the Local Government Code, local referendum is defined as the legal
process whereby the registered voters of the local government units may approve, amend or
reject any ordinance enacted by the sanggunian.

157. Distinguish Initiative and Local Referendum

Local Initiative is the legal process whereby the registered voters of LGU may directly propose,
enact or amend any ordinance while referendum is the legal process whereby the registered
voters of the LGU may approve, amend or reject any ordinance enacted by the sanggunian.

158. Are LGUs exempted from liabilities? (U.S. v. Guinto, G.R. No. 76607, February 26,
1990)

No. LGUs and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or
damage to property. The general law waiving the immunity of the state from suit is found in Act
No. 3083, under which the Philippine government “consents and submits to be sued upon any
moneyed claim involving liability arising from contract, express or implied, which could serve as
a basis of civil action between private parties.” When the government enters into a contract, it is
deemed to have descended to the level of the other contracting party and divested of its sovereign
immunity from suit with its implied consent. (U.S. v. Guinto, G.R. No. 76607, February 26,
1990)
The liabilities of LGUs include:
a. Liability for contracts
b. Liabilities provided by statutory provisions
c. Liability for torts
d. Liability for violation of law

159. What is the Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability? (Province of Cebu v. IAC, G.R.
No. 72841, January 29, 1987)

Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability provides that a municipality may become obligated upon
an implied contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits accepted or appropriated by it as
to which it has the general power to contract. The doctrine of implied municipal liability has
been said to apply to all cases where money or other property of a party is received under such
circumstances that the general law, independent of express contract implies an obligation upon
the municipality to do justice with respect to the same. (Province of Cebu v. IAC, G.R. No. L‐
72841, Jan. 29, 1987)

160. What is the limitation in the application of the doctrine? (San Diego v. Municipality of
Naujan, G.R. No. L-9920, February 29, 1960)

The limitation in the application of the doctrine provides that the doctrine of estoppel cannot be
applied as against a municipal corporation to validate a contract which it has no power to make,
or which it is authorized to make only under prescribed conditions, within prescribed limitations,
or in a prescribed mode or manner, although the corporation has accepted the benefits thereof
and the other party has fully performed his part of the agreement, or has expended large sums in
preparation for performance. A reason frequently assigned for this rule is that to apply the
doctrine of estoppel against a municipality in such case would be to enable it to do indirectly
what it cannot do directly. Also, where a contract is violative of public policy, the municipality
executing it cannot be estopped to assert the invalidity on this ground; nor can it be estopped to
assert the invalidity of a contract which has ceded away, controlled, or embarrassed its legislative
or government powers. (San Diego v. Municipality of Naujan, G.R. No. L-9920, February 29,
1960)

161. May an LGU be liable for torts in its exercise of governmental functions?
(Municipality of San Fernando v. Judge Firme, G.R. No. L-52179, April 8, 1991)

No, LGU may not be liable for torts in its exercise of governmental functions. The municipality
cannot be held liable for the torts committed by its regular employee, who was then engaged in
the discharge of governmental functions. Hence, the death of the passenger—tragic and
deplorable though it may be—imposed on the municipality no duty to pay monetary
compensation. (Municipality of San Fernando v. Judge Firme, G.R. No. L-52179, April 8, 1991)
162. May an LGU be held liable for torts in its exercise of proprietary functions?
(Mendoza vs. De Leon, GR No. L-9596, February 11, 1916; Torio vs. Fontanilla, GR No. L-
29993, October 23, 1978; Abella vs Municipality of Naga, GR No. L-3738, November 20,
1951)

Yes. In the case of Mendoza vs. De Leon, the court ruled that a municipality is not exempt from
liability for the negligent performance of its corporate or proprietary or business functions. It is
regarded as a private person in cases involving the administration of its patrimonial property, and
for liability to third persons on contract or in torts is concerned. When it contracts in its
proprietary functions, the stipulations are enforceable and damages can be collected for breach or
tort in the same manner and to the same extent as those of private corporations or individuals. In
these cases, the principle of respondeat superior applies.
In the case of Torio vs Fontanilla, the Municipality of Malasiqui, Pangasinan was held liable for
the death of a member of the zarzuela group hat the stage collapsed, on the ground that the
holding of a town fiesta is a proprietary function and under the principle of respondeat superior.
In the case of Abella vs Muncipality of Naga, where the municipality closed a part of a
municipal street without indemnifying the person prejudiced thereby, the municipality can be
held liable for damages.

163. What is the power of general supervision? (National Liga ng mga Barangay vs
Paredes, GR NO. 130775, September 27, 2004; Planas vs Gil, GR No. L-46440, January 18,
1939)

The power of general supervision is the power of a superior officer to see to it that lower officers
perform their functions in accordance with the law. It does not include the power to substitute
one’s judgment for that of a lower office in matters where a lower officer has various legal
alternatives to choose from.
In the case of National Liga ng mga Barangay vs Paredes, supervising officers merely see to it
that the rules are followed, but he himself does not lay down such rules, nor does he have the
discretion to modify or replace them. If the rules are not observed, he may order the work done
or re-done to conform to the prescribed rules. He cannot prescribe his own manner of doing the
act.
In the case of Planas vs Gil, Supervision is an active power. It is certainly not without limitation,
but it at least implies authority to inquire into facts and conditions in order to render the power
real and effective.

164. Who shall exercise the power of general supervision over LGUs?

The President shall exercise general supervision over LGUs to ensure that their acts are within
the scope of their powers and functions. (Sec. 25 (a) LGC)

165. May the Secretary of Justice exercise control over LGUs? (Drilon vs Lim)

No, the Secretary of Justice may not exercise control over LGUs. In Drilon vs Lim, the Supreme
Court ruled that the Secretary of Justice does not and cannot exercise control when he passes
judgment on the constitutionality or legality of a tax ordinance or revenue measure pursuant to
Sec. 187 of the LGC. He does not thereby dictate what the law should be but merely ensures that
the ordinance is in accordance with the law.

166. Distinguish power of control from power of general supervision.

(a) As to nature of power

The power of control is legislative; the power of general supervision is executive in nature.

(b) As to who exercise the power

The power of control is exercised by Congress; the power of general supervision is

exercised by the President assisted by the DILG Secretary.

(c) As to scope of power

The power of control:

(1) Creation, conversion of LGUs and alteration of its boundaries;

(2) Allocate powers, responsibilities and resources among LGUs;
(3) Provide for qualifications, election, appointment, removal, term, salaries and functions
and duties of local officials;
(4) Provide other matters relating to the organization and operation of LGUs and
Amendment of charters of LGUs (Constitution, Art. X, Sec 3).

The power of general supervision:

(1) Oversee whether LGUs are performing their duties in accordance with law;
(2) Investigate and impose disciplinary measures upon erring elective local government
officials (Joson vs Torres, G.R. No. 131255, May 20, 1998).

167. Do the local chief executives have the authority to exercise operational supervision
over PNP and other personnel? (LGC, Sec. 28; Andaya vs RTC, GR No. 12661, December
3, 1999)

Yes. Under Sec. 28 of the LGC, the extent of operational supervision and control of local chief
executives over the police force, fire protection unit, and jail management personnel assigned in
their respective jurisdictions shall be governed by the provisions of RA No. 6975 or the DILG
Act of 1990.
In Andaya vs. RTC, the Mayor has no inherent power to appoint the local chief of police. He has
only the limited power of selecting one from among the list of eligible recommended by the
Police Regional Director to be named the Chief of Police. The Mayor cannot require the
Regional Director to include the name of any officer, no matter how qualified, in the list. The
purpose is to enhance professionalism and to isolate the police from political domination.
168. Under the Local Government Code, what are the rules on the settlement of boundary
disputes? (LGC, Sec. 118; National Housing Authority v. COSLAP, G.R. No. 142601,
October 23, 2006)

Boundary disputes shall be referred for settlement to the following:

(a) Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan for disputes involving two (2) or more
barangays in the same city or municipality, as the case may be;
(b) Sangguniang panlalawigan for those involving two (2) or more municipalities within the
same province;
(c) Jointly, to the sanggunians of provinces concerned, for those involving component cities or
municipalities of different provinces; or
(d)Jointly, to the respective sanggunians, for those involving a component city or municipality
and a highly urbanized city or two (2) or more highly-urbanized cities.

169. What are the actions available in the settlement of boundary disputes? (LGC, Sec. 118
par. e; Sec. 119; Barangay Mayamot, Antipolo City v. Antipolo City, G.R. No. 187349,
August 17, 2016)

Boundary disputes between local government units should, as much as possible, be settled
amicably. In the event the settlement fails to effect an amicable settlement within sixty (60) days
from the date the dispute was referred thereto, it shall issue a certification to that effect.
Thereafter, the dispute shall be formally tried by the sanggunian concerned which shall decide
the issue within sixty (60) days from the date of the certification referred to above. (Section 118)
Section 119. Appeal. -Within the time and manner prescribed by the Rules of Court, any party
may elevate the decision of the sanggunian concerned to the proper Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction over the area in dispute. The Regional Trial Court shall decide the appeal within one
(1) year from the filing thereof.

170. What are the local elective positions under the LGC?

The local elective positions under the LGC are:

a. Barangay

-Barangay Captain

-Barangay Councilor (Kagawad)

-SK Chairman

-SK Councilor

b. Municipality
 -Mayor

-Vice Mayor

-Councilors

c. City

-Mayor

-Vice Mayor

-Councilors

d. Province

-Regional Governor

-Regional Vice Governor

-Regional Assemblymen

e. Sectoral Representative

-Party-list Representative

171. What are the qualifications of an elective local official? (LGC, Sec. 39; Japzon v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 180088, January 19, 2009)

1. Must be a Filipino citizen

2. Must be a registered voter in:

a. The barangay, municipality, city or province where he intends to be elected
b. The district where he intends to be elected in case of a member if the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang Bayan
3. Must be a resident therein for at least 1 year immediately preceding the day of the
election
4. Able to read and write Filipino/ any other local language or dialect.
5. Age Requirement
(b) Candidates for the position of governor, vice-governor, or member of the
sangguniang panlalawigan, or mayor, vice-mayor or member of the sangguniang
panlungsod of highly urbanized cities must be at least twenty-one (21) years of
age on election day.
 (c) Candidates for the position of mayor or vice-mayor of independent component
cities, component cities, or municipalities must be at least twenty-one (21) years
of age on election day.
(d) Candidates for the position of member of the sangguniang panlungsod or
sangguniang bayan must be at least eighteen (18) years of age on election day.
(e) Candidates for the position of punong barangay or member of the sangguniang
barangay must be at least eighteen (18) years of age on election day.
(f) Candidates for the sangguniang kabataan must be at least fifteen (15) years of
age but not more than twenty-one (21) years of age on election day.

172. Who are disqualified to an elective local post? (LGC, Sec. 40; Jalosjos Jr. v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 193237, 193536, October 9, 2012; Mercado v. Manzano, G.R.
No.135083, May26, 1999; Valles v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 137000, August 9, 2000; Frivaldo
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120295, June 28, 1996; Marquez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 112889,
April 18, 1995; Rodriguez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120099, July 24, 1996)

The following are disqualified:

1. Those who have been sentenced by final judgement for an offense involving moral
turpitude or punishable by one (1) year of imprisonment, within two (2) years after
serving sentence; The accessory penalty of perpetual special disqualification is
ground for petition to deny due course or cancel a certificate of candidacy under
Sec.78 of the Omnibus Election Code because this means that the conviction is not
eligible to run for public office, which is contrary to the state under oath.
2. Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to the Republic;
3. Those removed from office as a result of an administrative case;
4. Those with the Dual citizenship.
Dual citizenship as disqualification must refer to citizens with “dual allegiance”.
a. Dual citizenship by accident of birth-arises when, as a result of the
concurrent application of the different laws of 2 or more states, a person is
simultaneously considered a national by the said states. It is involuntary.
b. Dual allegiance-refers to the situation in which a person simultaneously
owes by some positive act, loyalty to 2 or more states. It is the result of an
individual’s violation.
Unlike those with dual allegiance, who must, comply with the strict requirements
R.A. No. 9225, it suffices for a dual citizen by accident of birth that upon the
filing of his certificate of candidacy, he necessarily elects Philippine citizenship
and terminates his certificate of candidacy he terminates his status as a dual
citizen. The citizenship requirement is the LGC is to be possessed by the elective
official, at the least, as of the time he proclaimed and at the start of the term of
office to which he has been elected.

5. Those who are fugitives as form justice in criminal or non-political cases here or
abroad; Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases here and abroad include
not only those who flee after conviction and to avoid punishment, but likewise those who
after being charged, flee to avoid prosecution. The definition of a “fugitive from justice”
 indicates that the intent to evade is the compelling factor that makes a person leave a
particular jurisdiction, and there can only be an intent when the fleeing person knows of
an already instituted indictment, or of a promulgated judgment of conviction.
6. the insane and feeble-minded; and
7. Permanent residents in a foreign country or acquired the right to reside abroad and
continue to avail of the same right.

173. What is the three-term limit rule? (Socrates v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154512,
November 12, 2002; Bolos Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 184082, March 17, 2009)

After 4 consecutive terms, an elective local official cannot seek immediate reelection for a 4th
term. The prohibited election refers to the next regular election for the same office following the
end of the 3rdconsecutive term. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall
not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of service for the full-term for which the
elective official was elected. A punong barangay who relinquished his office (of punong
barangay) during his 3rd term when he won and assumed the office as sangguniang bayan
member is deemed a voluntary renunciation of the Office of the Punong Barangay.
The three-term limit rule for elective local officials is also found in Section 8, Article X of the
Constitution, which states:
" The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be
determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three
consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be
considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.”

174. When does the three-term limit rule apply? (Borja v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 133495,
Sept. 3, 1998)

The three-term limit applies to bar an election for a 4th consecutive term when:
1. The local official has been elected in regular election, for three (3) consecutive
preceding terms, for the same position; and
2. He has fully served the three consecutive terms for which he had been elected.

175. What are the existing prohibitions and inhibitions applicable to an elective and
appointive local official? (Flores v. Drilon, G.R. No. 104732, June 22, 1993; Javellana v.
DILG, G.R. No. 102549, August 10, 1992; Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738, February 19,
2008; LGC,Secs. 89, 90 [a][b][c])

Section 89. Prohibited Business and Pecuniary Interest. –

(a) It shall be unlawful for any local government official or employee, directly or indirectly, to:

(1) Engage in any business transaction with the local government unit in which he is an
official or employee or over which he has the power of supervision, or with any of its
authorized boards, officials, agents, or attorneys, whereby money is to be paid, or
property or any other thing of value is to be transferred, directly or indirectly, out of
 the resources of the local government unit to such person or firm.
(2) Hold such interests in any cockpit or other games licensed by a local government unit.
(3) Purchase any real estate or other property forfeited in favor of such local government
unit for unpaid taxes or assessment, or by virtue of a legal process at the instance of the
said local government unit.
(4) Be a surety for any person contracting or doing business with the local government
unit for which a surety is required; and
(5) Possess or use any public property of the local government unit for private purposes.

(b) All other prohibitions governing the conduct of national public officers relating to prohibited
business and pecuniary interest so provided for under Republic Act Numbered Sixty-seven
thirteen (R.A. No. 6713) otherwise known as the "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials and Employees" and other laws shall also be applicable to local government
officials and employees.

Section 90. Practice of Profession. –

(a) All governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited from practicing their profession or
engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local chief executives.
(b) Sanggunian members may practice their professions, engage in any occupation, or teach in
schools except during session hours: Provided, that sanggunian members who are also members
of the Bar shall not:
(1) Appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit
or any office, agency, or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party.
(2) Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national
or local government is accused of an offense committed in relation to his office.
(3) Collect any fee for their appearance in administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official; and
(4) Use property and personnel of the government except when the sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interest of the government.

(c) Doctor of Medicine may practice their profession even during official hours of work only on
occasions of emergency: Provided, That the officials concerned do not derive monetary
compensation therefrom.

176. When is there a permanent vacancy? (LGC, Sec. 44)

Permanent vacancy occurs when an elective local official fills a higher vacant office, refuses to
assume office, fails to qualify, dies, removed from office, voluntarily resigns, or is otherwise
permanently incapacitated to discharge the functions of his office.

177. What are the rules of succession in case of permanent vacancy? (LGC, Sec. 44, pars. [b][c])

- 1. Office of the Governor-Vice –governor;

2. Office of the Mayor-Vice-mayor
 3. Offices of the Vice-governor or Vice-mayor - Highest ranking Sanggunian
member or, in case of his permanent inability, the second highestranking Sanggunian
member; and in the Office in case of tie between and among the highest ranking
Sanggunian members-resolved by the drawing of lots. For purposes of succession,
ranking in the Sanggunian shall be determined by each winning candidate to the total
number of registered voter in each district in preceding election.

178. What is the second-placer rule?

- Candidate who placed second will be proclaimed elected after the votes for his
winning rival, who was disqualified as a turncoat and considered a non-candidate,
were all disregarded as stray. In effect, the second placer won by default.

179. Are there exceptions in the second-placer rule? (Omnibus Election Code, Secs. 68,
69,and 78; Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649, April 16, 2013)

- Sec. 68. Disqualifications. -Any candidate who, in an action or protest in which he is

a party is declared by final decision of a competent court guilty of, or found by the
Commission of having (a) given money or other material consideration to influence,
induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing electoral functions; (b)
committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy; (c) spent in his election
campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by this Code; (d) solicited, received or
made any contribution prohibited under Sections 89, 95, 96, 97 and 104; or (e)
violated any of Sections 80, 83, 85, 86 and 261, paragraphs d, e, k, v, and cc,
subparagraph 6, shall be disqualified from continuing as a candidate, or if he has
been elected, from holding the office. Any person who is a permanent resident of or
an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office
under this Code, unless said person has waived his status as permanent resident or
immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the residence requirement
provided for in the election laws.
Sec. 69. Nuisance candidates. - The Commission may motu proprio or upon a
verified petition of an interested party, refuse to give due course to or cancel
a certificate of candidacy if it is shown that said certificate has been filed to put the
election process in mockery or disrepute or to cause confusion among the voters
by the similarity of the names of the registered candidates or by other
circumstances or acts which clearly demonstrate that the candidate has no bona
fide intention to run for the office for which the certificate of candidacy has been
filed and thus prevent a faithful determination of the true will of the electorate.

Sec. 78. Petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy. -A

verified petition seeking to deny due course or to cancel a certificate of candidacy
may be filed by the person exclusively on the ground that any material
 representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is false. The
petition may be filed at any time not later than twenty-five days from the time of the
filing of the certificate of candidacy and shall be decided, after due notice and
hearing, not later than fifteen days before the election

180. How may a permanent vacancy in the Sanggunian be filled? (LGC, Sec. 45 par. a)

- (a) Permanent vacancies in the sanggunian where automatic succession provided

above do not apply shall be filled by appointment in the following manner:

(1) The President, through the Executive Secretary, in the case of the
sangguniang panlalawigan and the sangguniang panlungsod ofhighly
urbanized cities and independent component cities;

(2) The governor, in the case of the sangguniang panlungsod of

component cities and the sangguniang bayan;

(3) The city or municipal mayor, in the case of sangguniang barangay,

upon recommendation of the sangguniang barangay concerned.

181. What are the requirements for the appointee in case of permanent vacancy in the
Sanggunian? (LGC, Sec. 45 par. b)

- The appointee shall come from the same political party as that of the sanggunian
member who caused the vacancy and shall serve the unexpired term of the vacant
office. In the appointment herein mentioned, a nomination and a certificate of
membership of the appointee from the highest official of the political party
concerned are conditions sine qua non, and any appointment without such
nomination and certification shall be null and void ab initio and shall be a ground for
administrative action against the official responsible therefore.

182. What if the Sanggunian member is not a member does not belong to any political
party? (LGC, Sec. 45 par. c)

- In case or permanent vacancy is caused by a sanggunian member who does not

belong to any political party, the local chief executive shall, upon recommendation
of the sanggunian concerned, appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy.
183. What does the law mean by “last vacancy in the Sanggunian”? (LGC, Sec. 45 par. b;
Navarro v. CA, G.R. No. 141307, March 28, 2001)

- The “last vacancy” in the Sanggunian refers to that created by the elevation of the
member formerly occupying the next higherin rank which in turn also had become
vacant by any of the causes already enumerated. The term “last vacancy” is thus
used in Section 45(b) to differentiate it from the other vacancy previously created.
The term by no means refers to the vacancy in the No.8 position which occurred
with the elevation of 8th placer to the seventh position in the Sanggunian. Such
construction will result in absurdity. (Navarro v. CA, G.R. No. 141307, Mar. 28,
2001)

184. How may a vacancy in the representation of the barangay in the Sanggunian be filled?
(LGC, Sec. 45 par. d)

- Under the LGC, Sec. 45 par. d, in case of vacancy in the representation of the youth
and the Barangay in the Sanggunian, said vacancy shall be filled automatically by
the official next in rank of the organization concerned.

185. Will there be a vacancy in the position of a vice-governor who is concurrently acting as
the governor? (Gamboa v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 134213, July 20, 1999)

- Yes. As ruled in the case of Gamboa v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 134213,there is no

vacancy whenever the office is occupied by a legally qualified incumbent. Asensu
contrario, there is a vacancy when there is no person lawfully authorized to assume
and exercise at present the duties of the office.By virtue of the foregoing definition,
it can be said that the designation, appointment or assumption of the Vice-
Governor as the Acting Governor creates a corresponding temporary vacancy in
the office of the Vice-Governor during such contingency. Considering the silence of
the law on the matter, the mode of succession provided for permanent vacancies,
under the new Code, in the office of the Vice-Governor may likewise be observed in
the event of temporary vacancy occurring in the same office. This is so because in
the eyes of the law, the office to which he was elected was left barren of a legally
qualified person to exercise the duties of the office of the Vice-Governor.

Being the Acting Governor, the Vice-Governor cannot continue to simultaneously

exercise the duties of the latter office, since the nature of the duties of the provincial
Governor call for a full-time occupant to discharge them. Such is not only consistent
with but also appears to be the clear rationale of the new Code wherein the policy of
performing dual functions in both offices has already been abandoned. To repeat, the
 creation of a temporary vacancy in the office of the Governor creates a
corresponding temporary vacancy in the office of the Vice-Governor whenever the
latter acts as Governor by virtue of such temporary vacancy. This event constitutes
an "inability" on the part of the regular presiding officer (Vice Governor) to preside
during the SP sessions, which thus calls for the operation of the remedy set in Article
49(b) of the Local Government Code —concerning the election of a temporary
presiding officer. The continuity of the Acting Governor's (Vice Governor) powers
as presiding officer of the SP is suspended so long as he is in such capacity. Under
Section 49(b), "(i) n the event of the inability of the regular presiding officer to
preside at the sanggunian session, the members present and constituting a quorum
shall elect from among themselves a temporary presiding officer."

186. How may the compensation and leave privilege of local officials shall be determined?
(LGC, Sec. 81)

- SECTION 81. Compensation of Local Officials and Employees.-The

compensation of local officials and personnel shall be determined by the
Sanggunian concerned: Provided, That the increase in compensation of elective
local officials shall take effect only after the terms of office of those
approving such increase shall have expired: Provided, further, That the
increase in compensation of the appointive officials and employees shall take
effect as provided in the ordinance authorizing such increase: Provided,
however, That said increases shall not exceed the limitations on budgetary
allocations for personal services provided under Title Five, Book II of this
Code: Provided, finally, That such compensation may be based upon the
pertinent provisions of Republic Act Numbered Sixtyseven fifty-eight (R.A. No.
6758), otherwise known as the "Compensation and Position Classification Act of
1989". The Punong Barangay, the Sangguniang Barangay members, the
Sangguniang kabataan chairman, the Barangay treasurer, and the Barangay secretary
shall be entitled to such compensation, allowances, emoluments, and such other
privileges as provided under Title One, Book III of this Code. Elective local officials
shall be entitled to the same leave privileges as those enjoyed by appointive local
officials, including the cumulation and commutation thereof.

187. When is a resignation of elective local official be considered effective? (LGC, Sec. 82
pars. [a][b][c])

- SECTION 82. Resignation of Elective Local Officials

(a) Resignations by elective local officials shall be deemed effective only upon
 acceptance by the following authorities:

(1) The President, in the case of governors, vice-governors, and mayors

and vice-mayors of highly urbanized cities and independent component
cities;

(2)The governor, in the case of municipal mayors, municipal vice-mayors,

city mayors and city vice-mayors of component cities;

(3) The Sanggunian concerned, in the case of Sanggunian members; and

(4) The city or municipal mayor, in the case of Barangay officials.

(b) Copies of the resignation letters of elective local officials, together with the
action taken by the aforesaid authorities, shall be furnished the Department of Interior
and Local Government.

(c) The resignation shall be deemed accepted if not acted upon by the authority
concerned within fifteen (15) working days from receipt thereof.

(d) Irrevocable resignations by Sangguniang members shall be deemed accepted

upon presentation before an open session of the Sanggunian concerned and duly entered
in its records: Provided, however, That this subsection does not apply to Sanggunian
members who are subject to recall elections or to cases where existing laws prescribe the
manner of acting upon such resignations.

188. What are the grounds for disciplinary actions of elective local official? (LGC, Sec. 60;
Aguinaldo v. Santos, G.R. No. 94115, August 21, 1992)

- LGC, Section 60. Grounds for Disciplinary Actions.-An elective local official may
be disciplined, suspended, or removed from office on any of the following grounds:
a. Disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines;

b. Culpable violation of the Constitution;

c. Dishonesty, oppression, misconduct in office, gross negligence, or dereliction of

duty;

d. Commission of any offense involving moral turpitude or an offense punishable

by at least prision mayor;

e. Abuse of authority;

f. Unauthorized absence for fifteen (15) consecutive working days, except in

 the case of members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang
panlungsod, sangguniang bayan, and sangguniang barangay;

g. Application for, or acquisition of, foreign citizenship or residence or the status of

an immigrant of another country; and

h. Such other grounds as may be provided in this Code and other laws.

An elective local official may be removed from office on the grounds enumerated above
by order of the proper court.

Clear then, the rule is that a public official cannot be removed for administrative
misconduct committed during a prior term, since his re-election to office operates as a
condonation of the officer's previous misconduct to the extent of cutting off the right to
remove him therefor. The foregoing rule, however, finds no application to criminal cases
pending against petitioner for acts he may have committed during the failed coup.
(Aguinaldo v. Santos, G.R. No. 94115, August 21, 1992)

189. Does the power to discipline include the power to remove? (Publico v. Villapando,
G.R. No. 147870, July 31, 2002)

- No. It is beyond cavil, therefore, that the power to remove erring elective local
officials from service is lodged exclusively with the courts. Hence, Article 124 (b),
Rule XIX, of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code,
insofar as it vests power on the "disciplining authority" to remove from office erring
elective local officials, is void for being repugnant to the last paragraph of Section
60of the Local Government Code of 1991. The law on suspension or removal of
elective public officials must be strictly construed and applied, and the authority in
whom such power of suspension or removal is vested must exercise it with utmost
good faith, for what is involved is not just an ordinary public official but one chosen
by the people through the exercise of their constitutional right of suffrage. Their will
must not be put to naught by the caprice or partisanship of the disciplining authority.
Where the disciplining authority is given only the power to suspend and not the
power to remove, it should not be permitted to manipulate the law by usurping the
power to remove. (Publico v. Villapando, G.R. No. 147870, July 31, 2002)

190. In whose jurisdiction a verified complaint against an elective local official be filed?
(LGC, Sec. 61pars. [a][b][c])

- LGC, Section 61. Form and Filing of Administrative Complaints. - A verified

complaint against any erring local elective official shall be prepared as follows:
 (a) A complaint against any elective official of a province, a highly urbanized
city, an independent component city or component city shall be filed before
the Office of the President;

(b) A complaint against any elective official of a municipality shall be filed

before the sangguniang panlalawigan whose decision may be appealed to the
Office of the President; and

(c) A complaint against any elective barangay official shall be filed before the
sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned whose decision
shall be final and executory.

191. Does the President have the power to discipline local officials? (Ganzon v. CA, G.R.
No. 93252, August 5, 1991)

- Yes. Since local governments remain accountable to the national authority, the latter
may, by law, and in the manner set forth therein, impose disciplinary action against
local officials. (Ganzon v. CA, G.R. No. 93252, August 5, 1991)

192. Distinguish disciplining authority from investigating authority. (Joson v. Torres, G.R.
No. 131255, May 20, 1998)

- A.O. No. 23:

Sec. 2. Disciplining Authority. All administrative complaints, duly verified, against

elective local officials mentioned in the preceding Section shall be acted upon by the
President. The President, who may act through the Executive Secretary, shall
hereinafter be referred to as the Disciplining Authority.

Sec. 3. Investigating Authority. The Secretary of the Interior and Local Government
is hereby designated as the Investigating Authority. He may constitute an
Investigating Committee in the Department of the Interior and Local Government
for the purpose.

The Disciplining Authority may, however, in the interest of the service, constitute a
Special Investigating Committee in lieu of the Secretary of the Interior and Local
Government.

Pursuant to these provisions, the Disciplining Authority is the President of the

Philippines, whether acting by himself or through the Executive Secretary. The
Secretary of the Interior and Local Government is the Investigating Authority, who
 may act by himself or constitute an Investigating Committee. The Secretary of the
DILG, however, is not the exclusive Investigating Authority. In lieu of the DILG
Secretary, the Disciplining Authority may designate a Special Investigating
Committee. The power to discipline evidently includes the power to investigate. AO
No. 23, however, delegates the power to investigate to the DILG or a Special
Investigating Committee, as may be constituted by the Disciplining Authority. The
President remains the Disciplining Authority. What is delegated is the power to
investigate, not the power to discipline. Moreover, the power of the DILG to
investigate administrative complaints is based on the alter-ego principle or the
doctrine of qualified political agency. The procedure how the Disciplining and
Investigating Authorities should exercise their powers is distinctly set forth in the
Local Government Code and AO No. 23. When an administrative complaint is
therefore filed, the Disciplining Authority shall issue an order requiring the
respondent to submit his verified answer within fifteen (15) days from notice. Upon
filing of the answer, the Disciplining Authority shall refer the case to the
Investigating Authority for investigation. Preventive suspension may be imposed by
the Disciplining Authority at any time (a) after the issues are joined; (b) when the
evidence of guilt is strong; and (c) given the gravity of the offense, there is great
probability that the respondent, who continues to hold office, could influence the
witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other
evidence. If the Investigating Authority determines that there is no prima facie case
to warrant the institution of formal administrative proceedings, it shall, within the
same period prescribed under the preceding Section, submit its recommendation to
the Disciplining Authority for the motu proprio dismissal of the case, together with
the recommended decision, resolution, and order. The Investigating Authority shall
encourage the parties and their counsels to enter, at any stage of the proceedings,
into amicable settlement, compromise and arbitration, the terms and conditions of
which shall be subject to the approval of the Disciplining Authority. After the
preliminary conference, the Investigating Authority shall issue an order reciting the
matters taken up thereon, including the facts stipulated and the evidences marked, if
any. (Joson v. Torres, G.R. No. 131255, May 20, 1998)

193. Is there a necessity for notice of hearing in case of an administrative complaint filed
against an elective local official?

- Yes. Notice and Hearing is necessary in case an administrative complaint is filed

against an elective local official. Section62 of the Local Government Code provides:

Section 62. Notice of hearing. –

(a) Within seven (7) days after the administrative complaint is filed, the Office of the
President or the sanggunian concerned, as the case may be, shall require the
respondent to submit his verified answer within fifteen (15) days from receipt
thereof, and commence the investigation of the case within ten (10) days after
 receipt of such answer of the respondent.

(b) When the respondent is an elective official of a province or highly urbanized

city, such hearing and investigation shall be conducted in the place where he renders
or holds office. For all other local elective officials, the venue shall be the place
where the sanggunian concerned is located.

(c) However, no investigation shall be held within ninety (90) days immediately
prior to any local election, and no preventive suspension shall be imposed within the
said period. If preventive suspension has been imposed prior to the 90-day period
immediately preceding local election, it shall be deemed automatically lifted upon
the start of aforesaid period.

194. Can the Ombudsman impose administrative sanction against an elective local official?

- Yes. The Supreme Court in the case of Alejandro v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R.
No. 173121 ruled that the Ombudsman has concurrent jurisdiction over
administrative cases which are within the jurisdiction of the regular courts or
administrative agencies. Section 15 of RA 6770 reveals the manifest intent of the
lawmakers to give the Office of the Ombudsman full administrative disciplinary
authority. This provision covers the entire range of administrative activities attendant
to administrative adjudication, including, among others, the authority to receive
complaints, conduct investigations, hold hearings in accordance with its rules of
procedure, summon witnesses and require the production of documents, place under
preventive suspension public officers and employees pending an investigation,
determine the appropriate penalty imposable on erring public officers or employees
as warranted by the evidence, and, necessarily, impose the corresponding penalty.
These powers unmistakably grant the Office of the Ombudsman the power to
directly impose administrative sanctions; its power is not merely recommendatory.

195. May an elective local official be preventively suspended?

- Yes, an elective local official may be preventively suspended. Section 63, par. of the
Local Government Code provides:

Section 63. Preventive Suspension. –

(a) Preventive suspension may be imposed:

(1) By the President, if the respondent is an elective official of a province, a

highly urbanized or an independent component city;

(2) By the governor, if the respondent is an elective official of a component

city or municipality; or
 (3) By the mayor, if the respondent is an elective official of the barangay.

196. May the Office of the Ombudsman impose the same sanction?

- Yes, a preventive suspension may also be imposed by the Ombudsman against an

elective official.

In the case of Hagadv. Gozo-Dadole, G.R. No. 108-72, the Supreme Court ruled that
in order to justify the preventive suspension of a public official under Section 24 of
R.A. No. 6770, the evidence of guilt should be strong, and (a) the charge against the
officer or employee should involve dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or
neglect in the performance of duty; (b) the charges should warrant removal from the
service; or (c) the respondent's continued stay in office would prejudice the case
filed against him.

The Ombudsman can impose the 6-month preventive suspension to all public
officials, whether elective or appointive, who are under investigation. Upon the other
hand, in imposing the shorter period of sixty (60) days of preventive suspension
prescribed in the Local Government Code of 1991 on an elective local official (at
any time after the issues are joined), it would be enough that (a) there is reasonable
ground to believe that the respondent has committed the act or acts complained of,
(b) the evidence of culpability is strong, (c) the gravity of the offense so warrants, or
(d) the continuance in office of the respondent could influence the witnesses or pose
a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other evidence.

197. May the court to which a criminal complaint against an elective local official is
filedimpose the same sanction?

- No. In the case of Talaga Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 169888, the Supreme Court
ruled that the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act implicitly recognizes that the
power of preventive suspension lies in the court in which the criminal charge is
filed; once a case is filed in court, all other acts connected with the discharge of
court functions -including preventive suspension -should be acknowledged as within
the competence of the court that has taken cognizance thereof, no violation of the
doctrine of separation of powers being perceivable in that acknowledgement. The
court must first determine the validity of the information through a pre-suspension
hearing. But once a proper determination of the validity of the information has been
made, it becomes the ministerial duty of the court to forthwith issue the order of
preventive suspension.
198. When can the sanction of preventive suspension be imposed?

- As provided in Section 6d3, par. b of the Local Government Code, preventive

suspension may be imposed at any time after the issues are joined, when the
evidence of guilt is strong, and given the gravity of the offense, there is great
probability that the continuance in office of the respondent could influence the
witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other
evidence: Provided, That, any single preventive suspension of local elective officials
shall not extend beyond sixty (60) days: Provided, further, That in the event that
several administrative cases are filed against an elective official, he cannot be
preventively suspended for more than ninety (90) days within a single year on the
same ground or grounds existing and known at the time of the first suspension.

199. What is the limitation in such preventive suspension? (LGC, Sec. 63 par. b)

- Preventive suspension may be imposed at any time after the issues are joined, when
the evidence of guilt is strong, and given the gravity of the offense, there is great
probability that the continuance in office of the respondent could influence the
witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other
evidence:

PROVIDED, That, any single preventive suspension of local elective officials shall
not extend beyond sixty (60) days:

PROVIDED, further, that in the event that several administrative cases are filed
against an elective official, he cannot be preventively suspended for more than
ninety (90) days within a single year on the same ground or grounds existing and
known at the time of the first suspension.

200. When may a preventively suspended elective local official be deemed to have been
reinstated? (LGC, Sec. 63 par. c)

- Upon expiration of the preventive suspension, the suspended elective official shall
be deemed reinstated in office without prejudice to the continuation of the
proceedings against him, which shall be terminated within one hundred twenty (120)
days from the time he was formally notified of the case against him. However, if the
delay in the proceedings of the case is due to his fault, neglect, or request, other than
the appeal duly filed, the duration of such delay shall not be counted in computing
the time of termination of the case.
201. Should an elective local official who was subjected to preventive suspension receive
salary? (LGC, Sec. 64)

- Salary of Respondent Pending Suspension - The respondent official preventively

suspended from office shall receive no salary or compensation during such
suspension; but upon subsequent exoneration and reinstatement, he shall be paid full
salary or compensation including such emoluments accruing during such suspension.

202. What are the rights of the respondent on administrative investigation and disciplinary
proceedings? (LGC, Sec. 65)

- Rights of Respondent. - The respondent shall be accorded full opportunity to appear

and defend himself in person or by counsel, to confront and cross-examine the
witnesses against him, and to require the attendance of witnesses and the production
of documentary process of subpoena or subpoena duces tecum.

203. For how long should the investigation last? (LGC, Sec. 66 par. a)

- The investigation of the case shall be terminated within ninety (90) days from the
start thereof. Within thirty (30) days after the end of the investigation, the Office of
the President or the Sanggunian concerned shall render a decision in writing stating
clearly and distinctly the facts and the reasons for such decision. Copies of said
decision shall immediately be furnished the respondent and all interested parties.

204. What is the limitation in the imposition of the penalty of suspension? (LGC, Sec. 66
pars. [b][c])

- (b) The penalty of suspension shall not exceed the unexpired term of the respondent
or a period of six (6) months for every administrative offense, nor shall said penalty
be a bar to the candidacy of the respondent so suspended as long as he meets the
qualifications required for the office.

(c) The penalty of removal from office as a result of an administrative investigation

 shall be considered a bar to the candidacy of the respondent for any elective position.

205. How should suspension be imposed? (Salalima v. Guingona, G.R. No. 117589-92, May
22, 1996)

- The Office of the President did not commit grave abuse of discretion in imposing the
penalty of suspension although the aggregate thereof exceeded six months and the
unexpired portion of the petitioners’ term of office. The fact remains that the
suspension imposed for each administrative offense did not exceed six months and
there was an express provision that the successive service of the suspension should
not exceed the unexpired portion of the term of office of the petitioners. (Salalima v.
Guingona, G.R. No. 117589-92, May 22, 1996)

206. May an elective local official be removed from office upon the order of the
Sanggunian? (LGC, Sec. 60; Sangguniang Barangay of Don Mariano Marcos v. Martinez,
G.R. No. 170626, March 3, 2008)

- No, the Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan cannot order the removal of
an erring elective barangay official from office, as the courts are exclusively vested
with this power under Section 60 of the Local Government Code.

The rule which confers to the proper courts the power to remove an elective local
official from office is intended as a check against any capriciousness or partisan
activity by the disciplining authority. Vesting the local legislative body with the
power to decide whether or not a local chief executive may be removed from office,
and only relegating to the courts a mandatory duty to implement the decision, would
still not free the resolution of the case from the capriciousness or partisanship of the
disciplining authority.

Moreover, such an arrangement clearly demotes the courts to nothing more than an
implementing arm of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang Bayan. This
would be an unmistakable breach of the doctrine on separation of powers, thus
placing the courts under the orders of the legislative bodies of local governments.
The courts would be stripped of their power of review, and their discretion in
imposing the extreme penalty of removal from office is thus left to be exercised by
political factions which stand to benefit from the removal from office of the local
elective official concerned, the very evil which Congress sought to avoid when it
enacted Section 60 of the Local Government Code.
207. How may an elective local official file an appeal? (LGC, Sec. 67)

- SECTION 67. Administrative Appeals. -Decisions in administrative cases may,

within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof, be appealed to the following:

(a) The Sangguniang Panlalawigan, in the case of decisions of the Sangguniang

Panlungsod of component cities and the Sangguniang bayan; and

(b) The Office of the President, in the case of decisions of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan and the Sangguniang Panlungsod of highly urbanized cities and
independent component cities.

Decisions of the Office of the President shall be final and executory.

208. Will such appeal prevent a decision from being executed? (LGC, Sec. 68)

- SECTION 68. Execution Pending Appeal. - An appeal shall not prevent a decision
from becoming final or executory. The respondent shall be considered as having
been placed under preventive suspension during the pendency of an appeal in the
event he wins such appeal. In the event the appeal results in an exoneration, he shall
be paid his salary and such other emoluments during the pendency of the appeal.

209. Is the so-called bar on midnight appointment applicable to local chief executives?
(Sales v. Carreon, G.R. No. 160791, February 13, 2007)

- This case is a typical example of the practice of outgoing local chief executives to
issue "midnight" appointments, especially after their successors have been
proclaimed. It does not only cause animosities between the outgoing and the
incoming officials, but also affects efficiency in local governance. Those appointed
tend to devote their time and energy in defending their appointments instead of
attending to their functions. However, not all "midnight" appointments are invalid.
Each appointment must be judged on the basis of the nature, character, and merits of
the individual appointment and the circumstances surrounding the same. It is only
when the appointments were made en masse by the outgoing administration and
 shown to have been made through hurried maneuvers and under circumstances
departing from good faith, morality, and propriety that this Court hasstruck down
"midnight" appointments. (Sales v. Carreon, G.R. No. 160791, February 13, 2007)

It is a State policy that "opportunities for government employment shall be open to

all qualified citizens" and "employees shall be selected on the basis of fitness to
perform the duties and assume the responsibilities of the positions."

The CSC is required to publish the lists of vacant positions and such publication
shall be posted by the chief personnel or administrative officer of all local
government units in the designated places. The vacant positions may only be filled
by the appointing authority after they have been reported to the CSC as vacant and
only after publication.

210. Are all appointments issued after the elections by a defeated official invalid?
(Nazareno v. City of Dumaguete, G.R.No. 181559, October 2, 2009)

- No, not all appointments issued after the elections by defeated officials are invalid.
However, it must be shown that the appointments have undergone the regular
screening process, that the appointee is qualified, that there is a need to fill up the
vacancy immediately, and that the appointments are not in bulk.

Each appointment must be judged on the basis of the nature, character, and merits of
the individual appointment and the circumstances surrounding the same. It is only
when the appointments were made en masse by the outgoing administration and
shown to have been made through hurried maneuvers and under circumstances
departing from good faith, morality, and propriety that this Court has struck down
"midnight" appointments.

211. What is recall?

- Recall is a mode of removal of a public officer by the people before the end of his
term of office. The people's prerogative to remove a public officer is an incident of
their sovereign power and in the absence of constitutional restraint, the power is
implied in all governmental operations. (G.R. No. 111511, October 5, 1993.
GARCIA, ET AL.vs. COMELEC)

212. What are the limitations on the exercise of recall? (LGC, Sec. 74)

- SECTION 74. Limitations on Recall

 (a) Any elective local official may be the subject of a recall election only once
during his term of office for loss of confidence.

(b) No recall shall take place within one (1) year from the date of the official's
assumption to office or one (1) year immediately preceding a regular local election.

213. How may recall process be initiated? (LGC, Sec. 70 par. a, as amended by RA 9244)

- Section 70. Initiation of the Recall Process.

a. The Recall of any elective provincial, city, municipal or barangay official shall be
commenced by a petition of a registered voter in the local government unit
concerned and supported by the registered voters in the local government unit
concerned during the election in which the local official sought to be recalled was
elected subject to the following percentage requirements:

1. At least twenty-five percent (25%) in the case of local government units with a
voting population of not more than twenty thousand (20,000);

2. At least twenty percent (20%) in the case of local government units with a
voting population of at least twenty thousand (20,000) but not more than seventy-
five thousand (75,000): Provided, That in no case shall the required petitioners be
less than five thousand (5,000);

3. At least fifteen percent (15%) in the case of local government nits with a voting
population of at least seventy-five thousand (75,000) but not more than three
hundred thousand (300,000): Provided, however, That in no case shall the
required number of petitioners beless than fifteen thousand (15,000); and

4. At least ten percent (10%) in the case of local government units with a voting
population of over three hundred thousand (300,000): Provided, however, That in
no case shall the required petitioners be less than forty-five thousand (45,000).

214. What are the procedures for initiating recall? (RA 9244, Sec. 1)

- SECTION 1. Section 70, Chapter 5, Title One, Book I of Republic Acts No. 7160,
otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, is hereby amended to read
as follows:
"Section 70. Initiation of the Recall Process.

a. The Recall of any elective provincial, city, municipal or barangay official shall
be commenced by a petition of a registered voter in the local government unit
concerned and supported by the registered voters in the local government unit
concerned during the election in which the local official sought to be recalled was
elected subject to the following percentage requirements:

1. At least twenty-five percent (25%) in the case of local

government units with a voting population of not more than twenty
thousand (20,000);

2. At least twenty percent (20%) in the case of local government

units with a voting population of at least twenty thousand (20,000) but not
more than seventy-five thousand (75,000): Provided, That in no case shall
the required petitioners be less than five thousand (5,000);

3. At least fifteen percent (15%) in the case of local government

nits with a voting population of at least seventy-five thousand (75,000) but
not more than three hundred thousand (300,000): Provided, however, That
in no case shall the required number of petitioners be less than fifteen
thousand (15,000); and

4. At least ten percent (10%) in the case of local government units

with a voting population of over three hundred thousand (300,000):
Provided, however, That in no case shall the required petitioners be less
than forty-five thousand (45,000).

b. The process of recall shall be effected in accordance with the following

procedure:

1. A written petition for recall duly signed by the representatives of

the petitioners before the election registrar or his representative, shall be
filed with the Comelec through its office in the local government unit
concerned.

2. The petition to recall shall contain the following:

a. The names and addresses of the petitioners written in

legible form and their signatures;

b. The barangay, city or municipality, local legislative

district and the province to which the petitioners belong;

c. The name of the official sought to be recalled; andd. A

brief narration of the reasons and justifications therefore.

1. The Comelec shall, within fifteen (15) days from

the filing of the petition, certify to the sufficiency of the
required number of signatures. Failure to obtain the
required number of signatures automatically nullifies the
petition;

2. If the petition is found to be sufficient in form,

the Comelec or its duly authorized representative shall,
within three (3) days form the issuance of the certification,
provide theofficial sought to be recalled a copy of the
petition, cause its publication a national newspaper of
general circulation and a newspaper of general circulation
in the locality, once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks
at the expense of the petitioners and at the same time post
copies thereof in public and conspicuous places for a period
of not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty (20)
days, for the purpose of allowing interested parties to
examine and verify the validity of the petition and the
authenticity of the signatures contained therein.

3. The Comelec or its duly authorized

representatives shall, upon issuance of certification,
proceed independently with the verification and
authentication of the signatures of the petitioners and
registered voters contained therein. Representatives of the
petitioners and the official sought to be recalled shall be
duly notified and shall have the right to participate therein
as mere observers. The filing of any challenge or protest
shall be allowed within the period provided in the
immediately preceding paragraph and shall be ruled upon
with finality within fifteen (15) days from the date of filing
of such protest or challenge;

4. Upon the lapse of the aforesaid period, the

Comelec or its duly authorized representative shall
announce the acceptance of candidates to the positive and
thereafter prepare the list of candidates which shall include
the name of the official sought to be recalled."
215. What should be the content of the petition for recall? (LGC, Sec. 70 pars. [b][2])

- A written petition for recall duly signed by the representatives of the petitioners
before the election registrar or his representative, shall be filed with the Comelec
through its office in the local government unit concerned.

The petition to recall shall contain the following:

a. The names and addresses of the petitioners written in legible form and their
signatures;

b. The barangay, city or municipality, local legislative district and the province to
which the petitioners belong;

c. The name of the official sought to be recalled; and

d. A brief narration of the reasons and justifications therefore.

The Comelec shall, within fifteen (15) days from the filing of the petition, certify to the
sufficiency of the required number of signatures. Failure to obtain the required number
of signatures automatically nullifies the petition.

216. When should the election for recall be held? (LGC, Sec. 71)

- Upon the filing of a valid petition for recall with the appropriate local office of the
Comelec, the Comelec or its duly authorized representative shall set the date of the
election or recall, which shall not be later than thirty (30) days upon the completion
of the procedure outlined in the preceding article, in the case of the barangay, city or
municipal officials, and forty-five (45) days in the case of provincial officials. The
officials sought to be recalled shall automatically be considered as duly registered
candidate or candidates to the pertinent positions and, like other candidates, shall be
entitled to be voted upon.

217. When shall a recall be effective? (LGC, Sec. 73)

- The recall of an elective local official shall be effective only upon the election and
proclamation of a successor in the person of the candidate receiving the highest
 number of votes cast during the election on recall. Should the official sought to be
recalled receive the highest number of votes, confidence in him is thereby affirmed,
and he shall continue in office.

218. May an elective local official sought to be recalled resign from his post? (LGC, Sec. 73;
Socrates v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154152, November 12, 2002)

- The elective local official sought to be recalled shall not be allowed to resign while
the recall process is in progress. Any elective local official may be the subject of a
recall election only once during his term of office for loss of confidence. No recall
shall take place within one (1) year from the date of the official's assumption to
office or one (1) year immediately preceding a regular local election.